In recent months the country has been witness to tempestuous controversy surrounding the Lokpal Bill. On the one hand we have a beleaguered government desperately trying to douse the fire of corruption on the other hand a few prominent social activists led by Mr. Anna Hazare seizing the initiative on creating the office of Lokpal to rein in the spiraling rise in the number of corruption cases involving high offices. It is to time to take a close look at the history of Lokpal Bill and how all th governments and political parties and their leaders conducted themselves on this issue.

While a small European country celebrated bi-centenary of the office of 'OMBUDSMAN' days back,India's has been celebrating the Golden Jubilee Year of the controversy over creation of the office of Lokpal which is the equivalent of Sweden's ombudsman. If this is not a mockery then we should be asking ourselves what mockery is!   When this office was created in Sweden way back in 1809 its main objective was to secure the interests of its citizens against the corrupt activities of a section of government officials. It is important to remember here that what Sweden did was later followed by Finland and Great Britain. Like these countries Denmark, Norway and New Zealand set up the office of "OMBUDSMAN' in the late fifties and sixties. Even the erstwhile USSR and other socialist countries recognized this menace and established the 'Office of Procurator'..  

K.M.Munshi was the first leader in our country who raised the demand an institution on the lines of Lokpal way back in 1960 which was raised and backed in writing by the then Attorney General late M.C.Sitalwad in 1962. Even the then Chief Justice of the Supreme Court lent his support in 1963. The subsequent years saw many distinguished persons and leaders becoming vocal with the demand which led to Administrative Reforms Commission making recommendations for setting up of the offices of Lokpal and Lokayukt..  

It is pertinent to note here that in a democratic set up the public administration which is run with instrumentality of ministers and administrative personnel with the goal of ensuring efficient public service has people at the core of the system. However critical we might grow with impatience and frustration over corruption and sloth of the system, it is an undeniable fact that without ministers and bureaucrats the system envisaged in the constitution can not be run. Therefore, we face situation in which the administration is assigned the role of protector of the interests of the people at the same time it could be also a fertile ground for all kinds of corruption. The fear of abuse and misuse of governmental powers has given birth to the concept of 'Lokpal' or 'OMBUDSMAN' in other countries.  

Efforts to draft a suitable legislation to bring Lokpal into existence began as far back as 1968 and the first 'Lokpal Bill' was introduced in Lok Sabha and was passed and to be sent to Rajya Sabha for its consideration and approval. Rajya Sabha sent the bill with proposals for certain modifications to Lok Sabha. Unfortunately the fourth Lok Sabha had an abrupt end and this Bill too was scrapped. That also signaled the beginning of a long, sickening 'Lokpal drama'. On the one hand we have had crafty, immoral politicians who were smart enough to highly prize the emotional content of this issue to make occasional noises about the need for Lokpal to further their prospects at the hustings,on the other hand a set of utterly corrupt bureaucrats, politicians and businessmen pulled the strings from behind to frustrate all efforts in this direction.  

In the course of last 50 years, the 'Lokpal' Bill made as many as 10 appearances in Indian Parliament but this nation and its feckless people have been betrayed as many times. The bill was not passed. It is important to record that Non-Congress Central governments brought maximum number of bills in this regard but as these non-Congress governments were very short-lived, the failure on this score is fairly understandable. It is equally important to note all these bills had provisions to include prime minister within the ambit of Lokpal. The bill which came before Parliament during Rajiv Gandhi's tenure as Prime Minister had proposals to include prime minister in the initial draft but it later modified to exclude him along with president, vice president and speaker of Lok Sabha. What is so patently clear is that the Congress Party has always been dragging its feet on the Lokpal issue and its past conduct seems to cloud every mind with its motive and sincerity in UPA government move to enact a suitable legislation to pave the way for setting up the office of 'Lokpal' in our country.  

The Present Lokpal Bill and Anna Hazare:

As we are all aware that the latest bouts of frenzy that are surrounding the efforts on the part of the government to present a new Lokpal Bill owe basically to the nationwide campaign launched by Mr. Anna Hazare and some members of civil society. It would be relevant to study some of the features of this Bill and some of the demands that Mr. Hazare and his associates made which were partly accepted . .

The Bill does not empower the Lokpal to act on his motion ( Suo Moto) to conduct any investigations into any irregularity and without the consent of the speaker of Lok Sabha or chairperson of Rajya Sabha.

The Office of Lokpal would be an advisory body and its powers would be limited to making suitable recommendations to the appropriate authorities. 

It would not have any power to register any report or First Information Report.  

CBI and the Office of Lokpal both would exist.  

The punishment which is proposed in the said Bill is seven years' maximum and six months' minimum imprisonment.  

The government rejected the following demands of Mr. Anna Hazare: 

The prime minister's office was not kept within the ambit. Similarly judges of Supreme Court and High Courts too were kept out.  

The conduct of members of Parliament was not permitted to be brought within the powers of Lokpal. 

Demand to bring bureaucrats holding lower positions within Lokpal's ambit was not accepted.   Demand not to allow presence of political persons on the Selection Panel of Lokpal met rejection.  

Besides these demands there were quite a few others which are either too idealistic or too ambitious to merit consideration. But the point is if this bill with all its warts meet a fate any different from its predecessors! We can not afford to be cynical but the history of Lokpal Bill has something in it which does not allow to be optimistic either!