FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, DELHI

Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility

Class Test
5/9/2011

Submitted By Jagriti Gupta Jitjyoti Pegu Ashok Chakravarthy Karan Agarwal 120 121 122 123

1.

Historically what has been the status of Lokpal bill over the years since it was first

introduced in 1968 in Lok Sabha. Ans. India's effort to have an anti-graft ombudsman in the form of a Lokpal institution may have caught national attention only now. But Parliament has made eight attempts since 1968 to pass a Lokpal bill, a different version each time, all in vain. 1966 to 1969 In 1966, the Administrative Reforms Commission recommended, inter alia, the setting up of an institution Lokpal to address the problem of redressal of citizens grievances.To give effect to this recommendation of the ARC, a Bill called the Lokpal and the Lokayuktas Bill, 1968 was introduced in the fourth Lok sabha in 1968. The Bill was considered by a joint committee of two houses of of Parliament and it was passed by the Lok Sabha in 1969. While the Bill was pending in Rajya Sabha, the fourth Lok sabha was dissolved and consequently, the Bill lapsed. Key Recommendations of the Administrative Reforms Commission

A citizen has the right to seek redressal against administrative acts of the government. He can either move court or seek other remedies such as petitioning his Member of Parliament. However, these remedies are limited because they maybe too cumbersome or specific grievances may not be addressed. Therefore, a more effective and simpler machinery is required to redress specific grievances of citizens against the administration.

Each government department should have a suitable machinery to receive and investigate complaints and set in motion the administrative process to provide remedies. There should also be two independent authorities to redress grievances: (a) Lok Pal, which shall deal with complaints against the administrative acts of Ministers or secretaries of government at the centre and the state; and (b) Lokayukta in each state and at the centre, which would deal with complaints against the administrative acts of other officials.

These authorities should be independent of the executive as well as the legislature and the judiciary. The Lok Pal should be appointed by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister shall consult the Chief Justice of India and the Leader of the Opposition. The Lok Pal shall have the same stature as the Chief Justice of India and can be removed only by impeachment. The Lokayuktas shall have similar powers as the

Lok Pal and shall be equivalent to the Chief Justice of a High Court. Their appointment should, as far as possible, be non-political.

The Lok Pal may either act on the complaints made by an affected citizen or on his own cognition. He shall investigate cases related to maladministration, which involves acts of injustice, corruption and favouritism. The investigations and proceedings should be conducted in private and should be informal.

On receiving a complaint, the Lok Pal shall decide whether it is worth investigating, then send for comments to the concerned department. After getting the report, the Lok Pal shall decide if he wants to proceed or not. If he investigates and finds that injustice has been done, he shall suggest remedial action to the department. If the department does not act on it, he can report to the Prime Minister or the Chief Minister, who shall report back within two months. If he is not satisfied, then he may bring it to the notice of the Parliament or the Legislature. If there are criminal charges against a public official, he can bring it to the notice of the Prime Minister or the Chief Minister and they can then set the machinery of law in motion and inform the Lok Pal.

1971 Indira Gandhi was still the prime minister in August 1971 when the bill was again introduced in Parliament. The 1971 legislation was never referred to any committee and it lapsed after the fifth Lok Sabha was dissolved. 1977 The third attempt was made by the Janata Party under Morarji Desai. The bill presented to Parliament in July 1977 did not include the prime minister but allowed for MPs to be brought under its purview. A joint select committee considered the bill and made recommendations, but the sixth Lok Sabha was dissolved soon after. 1985

Under Rajiv Gandhi, the Lok Sabha took up the bill once again in 1985 and it was referred to a joint select committee. Later, the bill was withdrawn by the government.

1989

The government under VP Singh was the next to bring a Lokpal Bill in the ninth Lok Sabha and it was sent to a parliamentary standing committee in 1989. But the bill lapsed due to dissolution of the Lok Sabha.

1996

Again, the Third Front government under Deve Gowda introduced the bill in 1996 and the parliamentary standing committee submitted its recommendations in 1997 suggesting amendments to it. The bill again lapsed after the Lok Sabha was dissolved. 2002

Vajpayee's National Democratic Alliance government introduced the bill twice, once during the 12th Lok Sabha and again in the 13th Lok Sabha.

National Commission to review the working of the Constitution

The Constitution should provide for the appointment of the Lok Pal. But the office of the Prime Minister should be kept out of the purview of the Lok Pal.

Its findings should be final and form the basis for action by the government. The Constitution should make it obligatory for states to establish the institution of Lokayuktas.

The Constitution should be amended to state that Members of Parliament may be prosecuted for the offence of giving or receiving monetary or other valuable considerations for voting in a particular manner or not voting.

An MP can be prosecuted after the investigating agency receives prior sanction from a committee constituted by the President. The committee shall have five MPs, nominated

by the President in consultation with the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha. 2007

Recommendations - Second administrative Reforms commission Lok Pal

The Constitution should be amended to provide for a national Ombudsman called the Rashtriya Lokayukta. The role and jurisdiction of the Rashtriya Lokayukta should be defined in the Constitution while the composition, mode of appointment and other details can be decided by Parliament through legislation.

The jurisdiction of Rashtriya Lokayukta should extend to Ministers (except the Prime Minister), Chief Ministers, and Members of Parliament. In case the enquiry establishes the involvement of any other public official, it can enquire against such public servants.

The Prime Minister should be kept out of the jurisdiction of the Rashtriya Lokayukta. The Rashtriya Lokayukta should consist of a serving or retired Judge of the Supreme Court as the Chairperson, an eminent jurist as Member and the Central Vigilance Commissioner as the ex-officio Member.

The Chairperson and members of the Rashtriya Lokayukta should be selected by a Committee consisting of the Vice President, the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India. The Chairperson and Member should be appointed for only one term of three years and they should not hold any public office later, except if they can become the Chief Justice of India.

Although the above reforms were suggested by the National review commission, none of them were implemented and the Lokpal Bill never came into existence.

According to Confucius, the inner sage means wisdom, authoritative conduct and bravery which are called three great virtues in The Doctrine of Mean. The outer king is the way of the king, namely, creating a better social environment for people to live a happy life. The inner sage and outer king mean changing inner moral into outer conducts for the people, namely, promoting what is beneficial and abolishing what is harmful, which is called moral governing, or authoritative government and the way of the king. The following examples showcase how Anna Hazare has demonstrated the great virtues of Inner sage and outer king.

Example 1- Wisdom: Anna Hazare is one of India's well-acclaimed social activists. A former soldier in the Indian army, Anna is well known and respected for upgrading the ecology and economy of the village of Ralegan Siddhi which is located in the drought prone Ahmednagar district of Maharashtra state. The erstwhile barren village has metamorphosed into a unique model of rural development due to its effective water conservation methods, which made the villagers self-sufficient. Earlier, the same village witnessed alcoholism, utter poverty and migration to urban slums. Inspired by Hazares unique approach of salvaging a hopeless village, the state government has implemented the `Model Village scheme as part of its official strategy. Hazare is now synonymous with rural development in India. From the above example we can say that Anna Hazare used his wisdom to change the ecology of his village initially. He was able to involve people in developing the village and making it a model village for other villages in the country. He motivated the other villagers to help create a better environment which will eventually make them happy. Example 2: Anna Hazare was able to draw huge supporters because he was able to clearly communicate how rampant and uncontrollable the corruption has got. Adding to that was the fear that the country was losing its sheen in the international community, being seen as the most corrupt nation in the globe, with no sensible national leadership. Anna Hazare has acquired the power or charisma by living a life centred around great causes.

Example 3- Authoritative and Brave: Anna has made loud and clear the point that the goals of the movement are non-negotiable, come what may. This comes under the characteristics of the inner sage which are, being authoritative and brave. Anna didnt giveup to the pressures of the government and gave the message that the propositions of the Lokpal bill made by his team will serve the purpose of greater good of the society.

Example 4- Decision Making: With fiery determination, the leader must make sure that the goals are achieved at any cost. Anna has also sent messages to his troops - "I am not going to give up, even if it costs my life". And there is no need for him to add, you also be like me - that happens by the sheer courage and commitment leadership displays. There can be many faces to the movement, yet the troops and the whole world out there know that decision making is centered with the leader, and just not anyone else. There were many news articles saying that emissaries are with Anna and await his decision.