Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]latest-news-updates/another-fast-from-anna-hazare-wont-help-the-lokpal-the-country-and-civil-society-leaders-by-saubhik-chakrabarti-9255.html"/> LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Another fast from Anna Hazare won't help the Lokpal, the country and civil society leaders by Saubhik Chakrabarti | Im4change.org
Resource centre on India's rural distress
 
 

Another fast from Anna Hazare won't help the Lokpal, the country and civil society leaders by Saubhik Chakrabarti

Anna Hazare has called the cabinet-cleared version of theLokpal bill a "deceit on the nation". That kind of rhetoric pretty much indicates Anna and Co's future plans. If they stick to those kinds of plans (Jantar Mantar protest theatre redux), this group of prominent people would miss a great opportunity - the opportunity to demonstrate their maturity.

Yes, the cabinet has cleared a Lokpal bill that differs in important respects with the civil society version. But, much more important, it is radically different from what the political class really wanted. There's almost zero chance that the government will yield any more. Another round of protest will, therefore, make all stakeholders worse off, especially civil society leaders who might find themselves pinned to the maximalist position. And since there's no revolution waiting to happen over Lokpal or corruption, another episode of Jantar Mantar-style brinkmanship won't change the rules of the game.

The mature thing for Anna and Co. would be to allow the game to play out now. Let Parliament debate the bill, let a parliamentary committee sift through it, let the bill be cleared and let the procedural details of the Lokpal be filled in - the time for aggressive interrogation, challenges will come then.

True, were Anna and Co to do this very sensible thing, they will fall off TV andTwitter star ratings, they will not be the principal actors anymore in the Lokpal story - elected representatives will be and after that, the institution itself, also, it is quite likely, politics being such as it is, politicians may want to start assuming credit for a reform they themselves had showed no inclination for. All this and more will happen - but that's how it is, and smart, pragmatic, serious reformers know it.

But, presumably, Anna and Co are in this for the cause, and not the show, and if the show shifts from Jantar Mantar to legislative and executive chambers, their interest should be in assessing the final outcome, not intervening in the process. That would be, to repeat, the mature thing to do.

No one, incidentally, is saying that the process might not need scrutiny. But it can't be anyone's case that the scrutiny can only be meaningful if scripted as another theatre of public protest. Serious reformers must now give time and space for legislative and executive deliberation and execution. As a high profile bill engendered by a high profile agitation winds its way towards becoming a law and creating an institution, those who want an effective anti-corruption watchdog must, first, watch.

But what about Anna and Co's arguments on what the cabinet-cleared Lokpal bill has 'left out'? That, too, is a question of maturity. Take the demand that the higher judiciary be under the Lokpal's purview. This demand has not been granted by the cabinet, and for good reason.

It would have had some grounding in pragmatic necessity had a specific institution not been under construction for regulating the higher judiciary. But the Judicial Standards and Accountability bill is tailored for this and to have abandoned it would have been silly. The government is right, and Anna and Co must give up on this and similar demands for now.

On the question of excluding thePrime Minister from the Lokpal's purview, the government is not convincing in its explanation - why should an ex-PM be liable for investigation and not a sitting PM? The argument that the PM will be subject to manipulative pressures were he to come under the Lokpal's purview is so weak it doesn't even deserve a rebuttal.

So, should Anna and Co make this at least a rallying point for their next round of agitation? No. Because, big as the government's evasiveness on this issue has been, the much bigger thing is to test the new institution and see how it works.

Indeed, Anna and Co should be watching hawk-like the appointments in the new Lokpal. Anyone remotely familiar with the system knows that there's no great law or no greatly planned institution that can't be undermined by appointing 'suitable' people. The Lokpal's members are to be drawn from the senior judiciary and persons of "outstanding ability" and "unimpeachable integrity".

There's no obligation on anyone's part to not scrutinise the official imprimaturs on the appointees, including those from the senior judiciary. Anna and Co can be constructive here, lending their weight and voice to arguments against any appointment that raises the slightest whiff of doubt.

Even those with the most severe reservations against Anna and Co's methods and logic so far would have to admit that the version of Lokpal bill we have now, one that looks like a serious attempt at setting up an anti-corruption watchdog, would have been impossible had it not been for the first agitation. But even those who have nothing but gasping admiration for Anna and Co would have to admit that another fast, another agitation would not just be ineffective but risks making the group irrelevant.

The reason for this is very simple. If you keep on refusing to acknowledge the primacy of Parliament and the executive in lawmaking and rule-creating, Parliament and the executive will just move on, and once that happens, the weight shifts.

Let's take the troublesome question head on: what if Anna Hazare goes on indefinite fast? If he doesn't listen to government entreaties, if he won't be persuaded, he must gently but firmly be taken away from that mode of protest. The Lokpal story needs to move forward now.