There was nothing wrong in pressuring government for speedy action in getting a strong Lok Pal Bill drafted and passed by the parliament at the earliest. There is nothing wrong in staging protest against lethargy of successive governments in fighting corruption and installing an independent authority to probe in corruption charges against any authority including Prime Minister.

But it is totally wrong to usurp the functions of parliament or executive. Constitutionally, the state functions are divided between Legislature, executive and judiciary. The function of drafting and passing any bill is that of parliament. A parliamentary committee may draft a bill. The committee may constitute members of ruling and opposition party. There is no concept of so called 'civil society' in constitution. consequently, the inclusion of certain members of 'civil society', who are members of Hazare team is extra constitutional, if not unconstitutional Constitutionality of formation of Lok Pal drafting committee has been challenged before Allahabad High Court.

Too much is being made of Lok Pal Bill. we are all opposed to corruption and want transparency in public administration. Corruption can be tackled by analyzing the causes of corruption and removing those causes. There is already mechanism for probing in corruption and there are also punitive provisions in law. Action is also taken in many cases although corruption remains an important issue. The Comptroller & auditor General is an independent audit authority who submits his audit report to Public accounts Committee of Parliament. Central Board of Investigation is also an independent authority to probe the corruption cases. Each department of government has a vigilance body. Chief Vigilance commissioner is a very important functionary in this respect. Lol Pal will be just an addition to this mechanism. Even if proposed Lok Pal is more independent, he will also need services of I.A.S. officers, other bureaucrats and secretarial staff drawn from government staff. There is no way to believe that proposed Lok Pal organization will function differently.

We may summarize that the practice of usurping authority of parliament by outsiders in name of so called 'civil society' is grossly unfair and may lead to anarchy.

Now, the Drafting committee has been appointed. Let there be no more disputes. Let every Indian come in support of it. Let everybody accept everybody’s support. Let there be no disputes on that too.

After all, India needs a strong Lok Pal Bill, which has everybody’s support. We want a strong and non-corrupt India where everybody co-exists on the basis of love and non-violence.

I wish and hope Anna Hazare will enlist the support of all Political Parties in Parliament and seek their help in passing the bill.

Now, the Drafting committee has been appointed. Let there be no more disputes. Let every Indian come in support of it. Let everybody accept everybody’s support. Let there be no disputes on that too.

After all, India needs a strong Lok Pal Bill, which has everybody’s support. We want a strong and non-corrupt India where everybody co-exists on the basis of love and non-violence.

I wish and hope Anna Hazare will enlist the support of all Political Parties in Parliament and seek their help in passing the bill.

This is group discussion. We have to answer in affirmative or negative on the topic. Whether the drafting committee is lawful or not is the theme. If you consider that this is lawful and constitutionally okay, state with arguments. If you feel that this is not lawful, state so with reasons. It is no use making any comments not relevant to the theme of the GD.

Personally, I don't think that appointing members outside parliament is a good practice. It is like again going backwards in circles. We are the ones who vote and elect our representative to the parliament and now we are the ones who want people outside the parliament to draft the bill. If this becomes a practice then there would be a danger of the parliamentary system collapsing.

Before I move to my next point, I would like to clear a few doubts. I, in no sense demean the contribution of Anna Hazare who has been the spear head of this fight against corruption. And I truly respect him. Also, I am ready to accept this incident of appointing members outside parliament as a one off incident but if it becomes a practice then we are heading towards more grave problems.

Firstly, India spends huge amount of resources on conducting elections and people exercise their right to vote to choose their favorite candidate. If they can't trust them, then there is something terrible wrong with our choice of candidates. Also, many voters may feel that their right to vote has become useless as now people outside the parliament will head committees. This will see less participation from Indian voters. This may start the end of the Indian parliamentary system.

Secondly, I see no transparent system wherein we can be sure that the people who are heading the committee now are not corrupt. Already there have been many accusations made against the members heading the bill. Same was the case with politicians heading the bill, so whats the difference.

Also, I am totally against handing the power in the hands of few, especially those who are not directly accountable to the nation. The representatives we choose are accountable to us but not the committee members who are appointed by someone else. The common man would hardly know of whats going on.

So to conclude with, I am against the practice of appointing members outside parliament to head committees. Though I can write off this particular Lokpal bill incident as a one off incident but not the practice. I would like to offer a few suggestions on how we can deal such situations more tactfully.

1. We should only select honest and right candidates. One should make sure that they judiciously use their voting power and bring the best man to parliament.

2. Independent corruption watchdog committee should be appointed and they should closely monitor the activities of all the members of the parliament.

3. All the parties should forget their differences and have a healthy debate on the bill and the bill should be passed if it beneficial to the people of India.

Parliament has the sole authority to consider any new law. The procedure is to draft a bill by a parliamentary committee. Later the bill is presented to parliament, discussed and after passing bvy majority, this becomes an Act of parliament. This is constitutional procedure and there is no propriety in making any exception to this.

However, drafting of bill by a committee including some non members of parliament is not unconstitutional. But this is extraconstitutional. Any recogniztaion of extra constitutional source of authority is dangerous and this should never be allowed. It is doubtful whether the draft prepared and submitted by the committee can be lawfully presented before parliament. At best, the outcome of this committee may be considered unofficial and presented to parliament. However, if both houses of parliament agree to the draft approved by this extra constitutional committee, this will stand ratified and will become law. The ultimate authority is still with parliament.

The formation of a Drafting committee by including some 'independent' and 'civil society' members is a deep rooted conspiracy by the UPA led by congress. Whenever in danger, the Congress has attempted to undermine parliamentary institutions. The toppling of first opposition party government in Kerala despite clear majority, imposition of emergency in view of Allahabad High Court Decision unseating Indira Gandhi from her parliamentary seat, extra constitutional authority exercised by Sanjay Gandhi during that period are pointers. Recent revelation of arms drop at Purulia for use by anand marg to destabile West Bengal Opposition Government also point out role of UPA in undermining parliamentary system.

The UPA government is being targeted by opposition for gross corruption in Common Wealth games and 2G scam. The UPA was in desparate need to sidetrack the opposition parties. Hence, the Hazare led Satya Graha was enacted and a committee formed for drafting new law. Opposition parties have been kept out of the committee and isntead so called civil Society members included.

Formation of Lok Pal Drafting committee is congress/ UPA conspiracy to undermine parliamentary institutions. This has no place in schme of constitution. It is doubtful whether opposition will accept undermining their legitimate duty and right as constructive opposition. All truly democratic minded citizens must oppose such paractices. Ultimately future of parliamentary democracy depends on safeguarding parliamentary procedures and institutions. Jawahar Lal Nehru had rightly said: Enternal vigilance is price of liberty.

The Lok Panel consisting of 'civil society' members is a result of 'Gandhian blackmail' that undermines parliament particularly oppostion and is a clever tool to sidetrack publicattention from opposition assault on corrupt practices of Unuion Government led by UPA. The public is misled to believe that this is Satyagraha Gandhian style. Hazare group differs significantly from Gandhi. Mahatma Gandhi believed in purity of aims and means. Sartyagraha is essentially a moral appeal to authorities to accept genuine demand. This can never be exercised to particpate in authority that belongs to others. Law making is perrogative of parliament. A Satya Graha to insist on parliament to pass the law for Lok pal is okay. But there can be no Sataya Graha to particpate in law making procedure. Usurping power and authority of parliament is neither SatyaGraha nor Gandhian. This is rather mockery of Gandhi.

The Lok Panel consisting of 'civil society' members is a result of 'Gandhian blackmail' that undermines parliament particularly oppostion and is a clever tool to sidetrack publicattention from opposition assault on corrupt practices of Unuion Government led by UPA. The public is misled to believe that this is Satyagraha Gandhian style. Hazare group differs significantly from Gandhi. Mahatma Gandhi believed in purity of aims and means. Sartyagraha is essentially a moral appeal to authorities to accept genuine demand. This can never be exercised to particpate in authority that belongs to others. Law making is perrogative of parliament. A Satya Graha to insist on parliament to pass the law for Lok pal is okay. But there can be no Sataya Graha to particpate in law making procedure. Usurping power and authority of parliament is neither SatyaGraha nor Gandhian. This is rather mockery of Gandhi.

Gulshan I wholeheartedly agree with your previous statements and hence I did not respond to that as I agree. But I would like to beg to differ on this, though not completely.

I think you were being rather extreme when you call this movement a Gandhian blackmail. I would like to know how does this movement is any different from the Gandhi's Satyagraha or Non-co-operation movement for that matter.

The only difference during pre-independence period and today is that at that time we wanted the britishers to go away from our country at any cost. Whether they brought good reforms and laws or not...we just wanted them out. And also, it was their government at that time and we wanted our people in the government. So things were fairly easy.

But now, we are fighting against are own corrupt government. At the grass-root level they are mere individuals..no congress no BJP, no UPA...Just plain corrupt individuals....So, Anna Hazare has followed the Gandhian method of satyagraha to stop this and was successful as well. But now it is upto us. Gandhi also never became a part of the government and same is done by Anna Hazare. Gandhi trusted his group and Anna Hazare is trusting his. I see no difference.

Also, this one off incident won't bring about a dramatic collapse. The power still vests with the parliament to make the bill law. The topic of the GD is that what if it becomes a practice and that is my cause of worry. If it becomes a practice then the whole system would get degraded and will collapse.

But name calling and mud slinging won't cut it. I think we should all understand the transition we are undergoing with the changing times.

It is time that we act sensibly, exercise our right to vote and bring in the best candidate who are knowledgeable and with morals.

And also, on a final note, whether committee members are from parliament or outside parliament, everyone is an Indian citizen first and if they do something that benefits the whole nation I dont see any problem with that.

This is apprehended by all that usurping perrogative of parliament by so called non politicians does not become a practice. This apprehension naturally arises from the fact that the first step itself is unconstitutional or extra constitutional. If the first step to involve Hazre team in law making process were correct or gewnuine, the very fear about this being a practice would not arise. This is definitely bad enough and is wrong ab initio. If we allow exercise of authority by extra constitutional elements like team Hazare, there is nothing to prvent recurrence of such tacticts and becoming practice.

As regards Gandhian role in Pre Independece era. the British rule by itself was based on British law and Indians had no moral binding to abide by that. Overthrow of unlawful usurpers viz. British by any means was okay. Mahatama Gandhi, Subhash chandra Bose and Bhagat singh were all justified in their attempts. Whether corrupt or honest, inefficient or inefficient, the Governmentof India today is truly representative of Indians and is as by law established unlike British. Presently, we appreciate neither Gandhian blackmail nor Maoist guns. There is no way other than to abide by constitution and parliamentary procedures.

As pointed out in earlier post, Mhatma Gandhi aimed at removing the British usurpers of Indian peoples' authority. Today Hazare group itself is usurper of parliament's authority. It may be okay to insist on Government and parliament to exercise their authority properly and quickly but it will be nothing but blackmail to take away authority of parliament by self styled Gandhians.

As regards usurping authority of parliament, the team Hazare and Maoists are sailing in same boat. Maoists have declared war on Indian state. Team HazAgare undermines authority of parliament and blackmails Goverment of India to unlawfully participate in law making process. Incidentally, some individuals like Swami Agnivesh are common to Maoist and Team Hazare. Nexus between Team Hazare and Maoists als o cannot be ruled out.

In fact, the UPA headed by congress were facing deep crisis by oppoition assault in parliament. So, team Hazare appeared as a shield. Team Hazare snatched opposition space and this helped UPA. Peoples' attention was diverted from enquiry by JPC and PAC on various scams. The LOK Pal panel movement hijacked opposition role and instead of real fight over corruption, diverted all attention and energy to drafting of Lok Pal Bill, which is simply a mechanism like C.B.I., vigilance Commission and judiciary. UPA is also equally gulty for rise of this extra constitutional forum. There is also reason to suspect there is nexus between UPA and team Hazare.

The extra constitutional Lok Pal committee is not new. Sanjay Gandhi also was extra constitutional authority during emergency.

We should also remember that every one will come with some seemingly good issue even for worst aim. It is rightly said that road to hell is paved with good intentions. Indira gandhi also imposed emergency for protecting her government in consequence of allahabad High court Decision but she expresssed the need of emergency for restoring discipline and orderin society.

As I said in my previous posts, I am totally against the practice and hence agree with your statements as they in essence means the same. However, we just differ on one thing. You believe that end (the result) justify any means while I believe means to get result are equally important. And just to add, this is Gandhian principle.

I hope you recall that India was on the verge of Independence when non-co-operation movement was staged but some protesters set ablaze a police station killing 23 people and Gandhiji called off the movement. We had to wait for 2 more decades to get our freedom. But I think it was justified. Afterall means to justify ends are important too.

And again I would stress that pre-Independence era and post independence era were totally different. Comparing them both would be liking comparing apples to oranges. Also, I would disagree that British government was not set up by law. On the contrary, our constitution is primarily based on the constitution of the Britishers. They were the one who brought constitutional law in India. We were a monarch nation before that.

Also, I am in no way saying that I endorse them. I am just talking thing/facts from neutral perspective without any preconceived notions.

And yea, I agree this is blackmail and as said earlier it should not be encouraged in practice.