The Jan Lokpal Bill, Anna Hazare, and Baba Ramdev

sanjeevpunj · Post by **sanjeevpunj** » 14 Jun 2011 06:16

^^^^^^^^

NICE! punning@HAZARE-duos.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 14 Jun 2011 06:29

Muppalla wrote:How Congress Gameplan Backfired?: - by IndiaTV's Rajat Sharma

This is obviously a journalistic "analysis", but if true (on the facts), it shows up BR pretty poorly indeed...Seems that the "issue", in other words the "this" in the "do this or I fast" equation, was completely incidental to the cause..And the cause was to emerge as some sort of a swing political player....Sequence of events..

1. Ramlila show necessary because AH seemingly "hijacked" the plan with his own show...
2. Essence of upmanship - AH had 1000, BR needs to have 1 lac..
3. Open to dealing with the govt on pretty generic terms, not much emphasis on the "this"..
4. Concern about reaction from "support base", about being perceived as "sarkari sant"..
And yada, yada, yada...

INC has acquitted itself quite shamefully in the whole episode as well..Instead of showing leadership, cycnical games were tried out...At the very least, it shows that this govt has lost appetite and/or credibility to show leadership on key issues - maybe B Raman is right..We should have a mid-term election and elect govt that make a fresh start, even a new UPA if that is the mandate..

Lastly, there is a significant amount of hair splitting on "civil society members" in the search committee...It would be instructive to go through the actual process as laid down.

The following selection process shall be followed:
a. The list of candidates received above along with their details received in the format mentioned above shall be displayed on a website.
b. Public feedback shall be invited on these names.
c. The search committee may decide to use any means to collect more information about the background and past achievements of these candidates.
d. All the material obtained so far about the candidates shall be made available to each member of the search committee in advance. The members shall make their own assessment of each candidate.
e. The search committee shall meet and discuss the material so received about each candidate. The selections shall be made preferably through consensus.
Provided that if three or more members of search committee, for reasons to be recorded in writing, object to the selection of any member, he shall not be selected.
f. Search committee shall recommend three times the names as there are vacancies to the selection committee.
g. Selection committee shall select such number of candidates as there are vacancies to the Prime Minister. The selections shall be made preferably through consensus.
Provided that if three or more members of selection committee, for reasons to be recorded in writing, object to the selection of any member, he shall not be selected.
h. All meetings of search committee and selection shall be video recorded and shall be made public.

There is very high amount of "consensus" being forced upon in the process...If anything, wiht the numbers it will be unwieldy..They need to cut down on the size of all these committees as well as the Lokpal itself...

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 14 Jun 2011 07:16

Baba Ramdev is one of the symbols of India's anarchy

The guy who wrote this article is supposed to be a former Supreme Court Justice....Completely nonsensical article that basically seems to imply that a person who is wealthy should not go after corruption. If this is the standards of rationalism within the Indian judiciary - any wonder any amount of 'checks and balances' seems to be unable to work for the country?

Pranay · Post by **Pranay** » 14 Jun 2011 07:19

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 843378.cms

Turning the charge of subverting democracy on its head, the activists pointed out that the government, by insisting on not including any Opposition leaders in the drafting panel, had behaved like an "elected despot". They announced their plan to start consultations with the Opposition and other political parties soon.

While a belligerent Bhushan called for a referendum to gauge public mood on the contentious issues of inclusion of PM, judiciary and MPs' conduct inside Parliament, Kejriwal challenged Mukherjee "or any other representative of the government" to a Lokpal debate at a time and place of their choice. "Unfortunately, the government is only interested in doing dirty politics. I will tell you what happened inside the Lokpal meetings. We give our arguments, the government only gives decisions. They have no arguments to make whatsoever," Kejriwal said.

Bitterly critical of the government and the barrage of allegations and snide remarks levelled at them, the activists were, however, categorical that they would not walk out of the committee. "If nothing, we will at least register a dissent note. It is very unfortunate that by doing all this politics, the government is frittering away an opportunity to take credit for drafting a good law," Kejriwal said.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 14 Jun 2011 07:20

^^^
all that the above shows is that we are still stuck in the Socialist mentality. that is one of the negative points of Gandhianism. we are left with a political and social commentary that keep believing in and hoping for some supernatural man who can live like a hermit and guide the entire nation. it happened once. doesn't mean it has to happen again. and certainly doesn't mean that we need to keep pining after that model and condemn every thing else.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 14 Jun 2011 07:35

somnath wrote: This is obviously a journalistic "analysis", but if true (on the facts), it shows up BR pretty poorly indeed....

I say "So what?". I have maintained this entire thing was and is a political play. As long as he is not "poorer" than INC leaders, then there is hope for the people. MMS has presided over governments that's only purpose seem to be running Scamathons - one after another. There are serious allegations on black money and corruption on Sonia Gandhi, P.Chidambaram and her coterie. Their partner DMK has been looting the country under INC's watch. EJ activities have increased. INC has Indian English media in its pocket.

INC and its leaders are so tainted that we do not have any choice but to offer chance to others. Do you think we ought to wait till it gets so bad that the country will set into chaos? It is best that mid-term elections are called in and people be given another chance for voting.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 14 Jun 2011 07:47

SwamyG wrote:is best that mid-term elections are called in and people be given another chance for voting.

+1...

Not sure if INC is the only complicit political party in loot (the record on all sides of the divide are pretty sleazy), but I for one have been very disappointed with UPAII - the most star-studded economic policy team after 1996, no Left, and still it has lost the plot...A new team, even if it is UPA ver III, will be able to make a fresh start...

While I hope for the above, I dont think its going to happen...No party is ready for an election...The "swing" parties - BSP, SP are gearing up for UP state elections next year - they dont want to fight something right now...DMK just got its nose bloodied, there would be no appetite for them to take to the streets again...Mamta Bannerjee has just gotten her long-held wish, fighting an election would be the last thing on her mind...Even the BJP looks as confused as it was before the 2008 elections - the younger guard would not want an election right now, lest they have to contenance another attempt by LK Advani to be the candidate...

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 14 Jun 2011 07:54

precisely, so what? what has the enlightened section of the india - the indian elite, done about this? zilch. the gandhis are vacationing, how much bile has been spent on that?

ramdev is being put through so much scrutiny, moral probity and analysis, where is the corresponding analysis, scuritny and probing of the gandhis? ramdev has a following of couple of lakhs. gandhis are actually ruling the country for close to a decade now.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 14 Jun 2011 08:05

somnath wrote:A new team, even if it is UPA ver III, will be able to make a fresh start...

The Mainos will continue to be a disaster for India as long as they are around....UPA-3 will probably induct Rahul Gandhi & the disaster-quotient is only likely to increase with time.

This needs to be recognized a serious problem for the country - what can be done to get the Mainos to quit the Indian political scene?

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 14 Jun 2011 08:08

shaardula wrote:gandhis are actually ruling the country for close to a decade now.

Correction..Mainos have been ruling for close to a decade. Nehru-Gandhis (including the Mainos) for about 4 decades.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 14 Jun 2011 08:14

Somnath:
I don't care what the other parties did in the past. I do not for the moment think they are totally clean. INC is the current party in charge of UPA. They have had the show running from 2004. 7+ years of corruption, nepotism and silently watching EJ is enough time to paint them with dark brush. Their leaders and alliance have looted the country enough, India has shown it can run the central government with enough alliances. So it does not matter if other parties are not ready. They will come together before elections. Democracy means getting the best out of the current, not searching for the perfect. Just because there is no perfect, no point in misrule.

If these scams were only conducted by BJP leaders, the media would have descended on them. New York Times would be screeching "Indian Spring" "Indian Summer" ityadi when handful turn out to protest.

The end goal, when it comes to corruption, is a country with reduced corruption - not a corruption-free country. One of the smaller goals is regime change - UPA has to place itself at people's court. DMK, how much ever corrupt, is the smaller fish among INC and big business in India. They have remained free. Clinton allowed his *ick to be sucked, an harmless act from a country's perspective; yet the State machinery was used to investigate the matter. Here the country is simply being torn apart and money looted. Allegations against Sonia Gandhi and MMS have to be investigated. If the allegations have no evidence, then they go free. S.Gurumurthy has solidly made a case in the public media. Time things reach the court.

Three goals
1) Reduced corruption (can be achieved by Bji's recommendation earlier....on the eGovernment ityadi)
2) Country goes to elections.
3) MMS and Sonia are investigated.

#1 is a long term process - it is generational. #2 and #3 are immediate in nature. Chaankya (BRFite) earlier mentions about leaders and corruption. My view is we, Indians, have become corrupt. Not because we want to be, because we have to survive. Call it the system setup or whatnot....it is a fact that we indulge in corrupt practices just like the big leaders. The big leaders steal in thousands of crores, while aam admi does it for his roti, kapada aur makhan. It is not that we all are corrupt, it is just that the corrupt people are more than the critical tipping point. We as a nation do not have a proper vision, neither we have any pride in our recent past. Only vague pride in centuries gone by. Fortunately post 1990, several glass ceilings have been broken, with the Western Economic crisis more are being broken. Indians see opportunities that did not exist 20 years ago.

Give people opportunities, vision and pride. Corruption will reduce. It will take a generation or two. And then the leaders will fall in line.

somnath wrote:...No party is ready for an election...

It is similar to British thinking, or was it Churchill to be precise. Indians are not ready to rule themselves. They are not fit onlee. yada yada. blah blah. Hindus will oppress Muslims and other faiths. More blah blah yada yada stuff. So in essence, since there is nobody, unfortunately the burden falls on the poor shoulders of the poor British onlee. Same logic for INC too, eh? Poor INC nobody in India is ready yet.

ps:
1. I will take JJ any day over Sonia.
2. The only claim for any honor, that MMS and INC can make is on the economic growth. Well India grew even before. They were given motorcycle, than a bi-cycle; ofcourse it is going to zoom. All they have to do is balance the bike.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 14 Jun 2011 08:32

^^^
SwamyG:
++1.

the logic behind "everybody is the same onlee," represents a defeatist mentality at best or an insidious agenda at worst. this nonsense about how INC is the only option etc is BS. it is clever propaganda. we can get any alliance we want. it's happened before and might/will happen again. no reason to worry. the INC pamphleteers must be getting desperate if they're openly peddling Churchillian anti-Indian arguments.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 14 Jun 2011 09:32

SwamyG wrote:They will come together before elections. Democracy means getting the best out of the current, not searching for the perfect. Just because there is no perfect, no point in misrule

Not sure you the point..I wasnt talking about the desirability of a mid-term elections (which I think is a good idea), but the plausibility of it...Elections, mid-term ones that is, dont happen automatically, or by magic...A very large section of the political firmament needs to be ready to push for it in the Parliamentary domain...Only pointing out that tons of key players have their own vested interests in maintaining the status quo, from the Right to the Left and everywhere in between..To comapre it with the British notion of "Indians not ready" is, well...In case there is a critical mass that coalesces in favour of elections, it will be good, but doesnt seem likely at this point..

#1 is a long term process - it is generational. #2 and #3 are immediate in nature. Chaankya (BRFite) earlier mentions about leaders and corruption. My view is we, Indians, have become corrupt. Not because we want to be, because we have to survive

Separately, I am astonished at the tenor of "gloom and doom" and despair in the narrative...Sure we have increasing anger against the government on corruption, but this anger isnt a desparate flail to engender a revolution...It is an "aspirational anger", if I may use that term...People are more prosperous than before, and want the politicians to ensure that growth continues unabated..Frequent headlines of corruption does not help the growth story...

Corruption isnt going to go away with e-governance, its just one of the tools...The structural issue with corruption is about residuary powers with the govt...And people are looking to whittle that down...Lokpal is what esentially? Take residuary powers of the executive out of "political interference"...There are similar residuary powers across various walks of life, primarily economic that will need to be addressed - which is what people are asking for - "indpeendent" Lokpal, "independent" oil&gas regulator (refer to the CAG report on D6), "independent" telecom regulator and so on...

Add to the increased aspiration the spread of mass media and internet, and people want to "kick butt" instantly at every piece of news that comes out - we have news flashing today of riots in even in Chinese cities, on issues of corruption...the challenge before the leadership is to kick the right butts...

But taking a step back and looking at the big picture, the same doesnt look bad at all...There is a deeper and more intense engagement of people with politics...The pavlovian anti-incumbency of the '80s and early '90s have given way to more discriminating trends....And govts are being forced to be more responsive..Nitish Kumar, Narendra Modi, Naveen PAtnaik, Tarun Gogoi, Sheila Dixit - all being rewarded on performance...And others who are being ruthlessly kicked out - Laloo, Mulayam, LEft....There is a level of anger right now against UPAII, and if they dont get their bearings, they too will be kicked out...

But there is no "gloom and doom", no "tahrir square" - India continues to be the hottest story around, the struggle is to ensure that it remains likewise...

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 14 Jun 2011 09:53

somnath wrote: The fact that under the criminal law as it exists today, all alleged crimes need to be "admitted" by a court of law before prosecution proceedings can begin...The judge (or bench) decides based on the preliminary complaint and investigation whether there is a prima facie case - its only after that the case is admitted and the process begins...What I have proposed for the PM is something pretty similar, the difference being that the SC bench will validate a complaint as having prima facie evidence/validity for the Lokpal to act on, rather than a court trial...

If a complaint is brought against the PM, then LokPal will evaluate the prima-facie evidence to determine if the complaint is legitimate and worth further investigation or malicious. If LokPal determines that the complaint is malicious, then action can be taken against the complaining party by Lokpal as a deterrent measure.

If LokPal decides that the complaint has weight, then investigations will begin. If investigations reveal nothing, then the case will be dropped, otherwise it will ultimately end up in court. At that point normal judicial proceedings take over. So your concern is already accounted for by the mare fact that the PM is not treated as a "special" entity.

Dhiman wrote: The issue isnt about the "common man" vis a vis the PM...

It is. If it wasn't, there would be no such thing as LokPal. Anna Hazare and Ramdev wouldn't be fasting and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Its about vested interests, that have more than enough money at their disposal cranking up pressure on a particular PM by starting to file reams of complaints...

No, its about getting rid of corruption in government and hence protecting the common man who has in many ways been victimized by the very government he/she elects. This is NOT about building in added protection for PM from being investigated.

As a random example, remember VP Singh and St Kitts, that imaginary "corruption" case against him? It durfaced surprisingly when he as FM initiated "tax raids" (used ot be an FM pet tool those days) against certain business groups, in fact specifically a certain group...

Your example is based on hearsay and your own interpretation of events. Even if by remote chance I assume this to be true, the fact of the matter is that a part of the job of PM is to be able to take tough decisions in the interest of people while being able to navigate through personal attacks and all the political circus. Anyone who can't do this, should not be a PM. Certainly VP Singh didn't last too long and most of the time he was either busy fighting fires or lighting his own fires.

In any case Bofors would be a better "random example."

somnath wrote: ~~The suggestion perhaps also goes some way in alleviating the fears of people like Fali Nariman and Soli Sorabjee, who dont want the PM to be in the ambit at all...~~

I prefer to focus on the issues rather that dropping names as a mechanism from bringing credibility or support to a particular POV.

somnath wrote: It is actually an amazingly flexible structure at the discretion of the Lokpal - not sure how "funding squeeze" can be applied, even if someone were to take that view...

I gave "funding" as one example of where bottlenecks can be put in path of the LokPal system to make it ineffective. I am sure you can think a bit creatively here as the corrupt in India do. I mean, really, did you ever imagine that highest levels of government would collude with large respectable business houses, and top media houses to create a conspiracy for a massive corruption scandle that would defraund the poor and hungry people of this country out of billions that would have been better spend reduce malnutrition in this country or perhaps reducing the alarming rate at which farmers in this country commit sucide due to lack of livelihood or due to bad loans. So be creative. There are very good and historically sound reasons for being so.

Secondly, do you have any understanding how widespread corruption is in India? If the LokPal does it job properly, it will first start by doing a complete investigation of the "income tax department" that will end up putting literally hundreds and hundreds in jail. Next on the list would be this dark spot on Indian democracy known as IAS. Again if lokPal does its job, hundreds and hundreds of IAS officials will end up in Jail with their family life destroyed and finances completely scattered. Then there is the MES, the customs, the IPS, and a whole list of never ending government agencies and department.

The point being, the amount of pressure that LokPal will be under (provided LokPal dies it job) would be tremendous. This department, if it does it job, means that people lives are going to be destroyed. Those people who have so far simply treated their government jobs as a person bank.

somath wrote: But to conclude from that that the govt uses funding as a lever to get its own way with institutions is stretching it beyond credulity..No one from these places, not RBI, not EC, nor indeed the judiciary has ever said that...

That is exactly what the supreme court said and that too very recently as part of its forays into this telecom scam. I am trying to find the news source for you (and hopefully will be able to locate it), but feel free to do your own search.

As for EC, its largely an ineffective organization. There is no greater concentration of criminals in this country than in National and state parliaments - please read up on surveys of criminals and family members that dominate the state and national parliaments. If this continuous elections will sooner or later become moot. Let me know if you need more details.

RBI can print its own money.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 14 Jun 2011 10:33

somnath wrote:But taking a step back and looking at the big picture, the same doesnt look bad at all...There is a deeper and more intense engagement of people with politics...The pavlovian anti-incumbency of the '80s and early '90s have given way to more discriminating trends....And govts are being forced to be more responsive..Nitish Kumar, Narendra Modi, Naveen PAtnaik, Tarun Gogoi, Sheila Dixit - all being rewarded on performance...And others who are being ruthlessly kicked out - Laloo, Mulayam, LEft....There is a level of anger right now against UPAII, and if they dont get their bearings, they too will be kicked out...

But there is no "gloom and doom", no "tahrir square" - India continues to be the hottest story around, the struggle is to ensure that it remains likewise...

Completely the wrong attitude to have. Its possible you are getting quite confused as to who your audience is.

This is the language I would use for a foreign investor looking to invest in India or with an overseas business partner. But to mouth these platitudes to folks and activists who are looking to remake and create the better India on the ground is a serious joke.

If India emerged unscathed from the Emergency it was obviously no thanks to people like you whose interest was restricted to academically commenting that things would turn out all right in the end. India owed it to those who actually felt outraged enough and expressed this outrage in whatever way they were capable of - that's what stopped India from becoming a banana republic in the seventies. The Mainos are on a similar, only way more dangerous, mission today: and if India emerges unscathed at the end it will be thanks to those who have taken the trouble to express their outrage today, in whatever manner they are capable of.

Btw, it is not as if you have always looked at issues from a purely academic perspective. You have in the past been moved enough to take a highly activist stance on the issues of Binayak Sen, on Salwa Judum, on the RSS, and on the issue of 'Hindu terrorism' (while disputing the presence of Christian terrorism in India). On the issues of corruption, dynasticism, anti-Hindu communalism - the tone suddenly changes to one of academic interest- 'Yes, this is unfortunate. But you know what, this too shall pass. The India story is not and should not be affected in any way."

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 14 Jun 2011 10:59

brihaspati wrote:Can posters post material about the members given in the list of the NAC - that is supposed to be an interface to "civil society" - and discuss their ideological profile, past overt positions on issues. We should have a good idea of what the government may have in mind as a definition of "civil society".

We already have some behavioural or POV material on AH - such as flogging on "alcoholism". I am assuming that BR will never be considered "civil society" by the self-appointed and INC approved "civil society". So what about the list in the current NAC? Also were there members in the past who do not appear in the current list?

From Maloy Dhar

Soon after independence we heard Jawaharlal scathingly attacked the corrupt people and the illegal market manipulators. He was brave enough to announce that he would hang the corrupt people by the next lamppost.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 14 Jun 2011 11:28

Dhiman wrote:RBI can print its own money

??You think that when RBI needs to pay its staff salaries at the end of each month, it simply asks the printing press @ Mint street to crank up production by a few crores?! The costs of maintaining RBI comes from the same source that all statutory bodies/PSUs are funded - GOI...You are confusing the authority to conduct monetary policy (printing money is one element of it) to fiscal independence (spend as much money as you want to by printing it)...The latter is the exclusive preserve of GOI....
I would be very interested in seeing any reference made by a constitutional authority that the govt is blackmailing it with funding strings....

Anyways, substantively, the point on "extra protection" to PM is valid, not least because the like sof Soli S and Fali N are raising it...Its not about "dropping names", but taking experience from people who have it...Few people would know the pitfalls of the legal system and the room for vested interest peddling more than them...And if the option is between having the PM in and not having him in the ambit at all - I would rather go midway and build in an extra layer of protection in order to get the acquiescnece of the naysayers...Normal give-and-take in any negotiations...Not sure how it is materially damaging...
(One correction - the St Kitts case was filed against VP Singh when he had resigend from the INC)..

About pressure being brought on te Lokpal, well that is precisely why it is sought to be set up as an independent, preferably Constitutional authority - to ringfence it out of executive pressures...Thats the basic idea!

Arjun wrote:If India emerged unscathed from the Emergency it was obviously no thanks to people like you whose interest was restricted to academically commenting that things would turn out all right in the end. India owed it to those who actually felt outraged enough and expressed this outrage in whatever way they were capable of - that's what stopped India from becoming a banana republic in the seventies. The Mainos are on a similar, only way more dangerous, mission today: and if India emerges unscathed at the end it will be thanks to those who have taken the trouble to express their outrage today, in whatever manner they are capable of

You miss that India has changed massively between the Emergency and now...In the '70s, Indians (well, bengalis in speific) only grumbled when the Left govt brought in that asinine rule of not teaching English till secondary school...Or pretty much destroyed Presidency College by innvoking the "common teacher pool"...Today, Indians engage with the system in myriad different ways - so an MMJ or an AS cannot get away trying to mess around with the IIXs, without taking to the streets...A cause for Priyadasrshini Mattoo can be taken up, successfully by a coordinated media-civil society effort, along with people taking to the streets, without calling for revolution...A campaign against corruption can be waged in well-coordinated exercises (Facebook, media the works) in the Anna Hazare campaign, forcing the govt to hasten on specific objectives...It no longer requires a JP exhorting the armed forces to revolt...

Today, if I am outraged with MMJ/AS messing aroudn with IIXs, there were/are effective ways of expressing my outrage than generally taking to the streets mouthing slogans...sometimes, that too, but Arvind K's success in this Lokpal affair owes as much to the "fast" by AH as it does to the superbly coordinated campaign, hitting the right quarters, using email, internet, facebook and media - and a lot of people (myself included, in a very very small way) having contributed their bits without being physically present at Jantar Mantar..And no one, not KV Kamath (who was leading that "outrage" against MMJ), and not Arvind K, talked about "revolutionary" regime changes...

There are no platitudes, but a focused, determined attention to the objective and getting the govt to respond..Not flailing aimlessly asking for "mainowad" to be fininshed, about Rahul Gandhi, Christian evangelism and everything under the sun with no clear aim and agenda...Which is what the JP movement was about - the aims beyond throwing out Indira Gandhi wasnt clear, JP himself seemed confused in his objeectives...But that was the India of 1977, Arvind K is the India of 2011!

On top of all this, callous govts are thrown away in massive mandates during elections, while responsive ones are returned to power...In much greter intensities (just look at voting %s) than ever before..

It is not about being "inactive", it is about having a clear sense of proportion of what the issue is, what is required to be done to address it, and not cry "revolution" at every instance....

Sushupti · Post by **Sushupti** » 14 Jun 2011 13:10

Asked whether she would not soften her stand on the controversial re-election of home minister P Chidambaram and the Court case around it, she said there is no question of such a move.

"There was a fraud committed by the data entry operator and votes won by Chidambaram was credited to my candidate and our votes were were credited to him," she said, asking Chidambaram to resign and fight the election again. "Mr Chidambaram has committed a fraud on the Nation.. We have given all the details to the High Court," she added.

http://rtn.asia/652_jayalalitha-says-re ... -premature

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 14 Jun 2011 13:13

duplicate post by accident, deleted

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 14 Jun 2011 13:13

Arjun wrote:
KLNMurthy wrote:Investigative offices in any government are an inherently intractable problem--they have to be part of the government machinery while remaining independent of it. CBI, CVC, all of the judiciary, and in the US, the attorney-general's office all try to square the circle in some way by building in some combination of constitutional firewall, administrative convention, and penalties for abuse. The designers of the Lok Pal and its proponents haven't shown at all that they understand the nature of the problem, the variables involved, and how to go about designing and evaluating a solution.
KLN, I find your views to be the most rational of the lot on this forum.

Can you provide some elaboration on the bolded part above? This is exactly what is missing in the current Lokpal bill.

[I am doing quite a bit of comparison below between US and India here, just want to say that it is not with the intent of proving one system or other 'superior', or saying that India has to ape the US in everything; but comparing helps to elicit underlying concepts and design principles, otherwise one can get trapped by frog-in-the-well syndrome]

In the US, where the executive and legislature are separate (unlike in India) the legislative branch took some steps since the time of Nixon to limit the powers of the President to interfere in the Attorney General's work. For example, AG can appoint a Special Prosecutor to look into any issue, and the sp. prosecutor has nearly unlimited latitude to investigate and file a case for prosecution. After Nixon's time US legislature passed laws to restrict the ability of the President to fire the special prosecutor. But since the AG is appointed by the President (though he has to be confirmed by the senate, so president has to be careful about bringing in someone who is a complete toady), there will be some political coordination between the President and the AG.

Both India and the US share approximately the same degree of structural independence of the judiciary. Again, this doesn't prevent the judiciary from being political or corrupt or having conflict of interest: Ahmadi in India benefited from the Bhopal case judgment where he was the judge; Thomas in the US is giving rise to concerns about his wife's political activities (some of which will culminate in landmark lawsuits which will end up before the supreme court); Chandrachud (I think it was) in India retroactively vacated Indira Gandhi's corruption conviction during Emergency, and in the US the Supreme court majority appointed by Bush Sr. favored Bush Jr in the 2000 election by putting a stop to the vote recount in Florida that looked like it might put Gore over the top. So, roughly India and the US share the same strengths and weaknesses in this area.

The other way (quite strong in practice) of curbing conflict of interest between investigators and government is by convention and practice--it is "not done" and invites opprobrium in elite public forums. This is what I mean by administrative convention. In Bush Jr's administration, there was a scandal about the White House's efforts to influence US Attorneys (who are like regional managers under the attorney general) in the choice of what case they will pick up to prosecute, firstly on the grounds of impropriety, and secondly on legal grounds--US has very explicit laws that lay down severe penalties for interfering with an ongoing investigation; not enough evidence turned up to justify such a charge in the US Attorneys case, but the stain remained. Interestingly, this expectation of independence by convention transcends party loyalties--the US Attorneys are political appointees, though their tenure can span multiple administrations. In this case, even US Attorneys who were Republicans stood up and complained about attempts to influence their case selections. What we see here is a culture of professionals that have an expectation of independence, along with a legal framework that supports that independence. In case of India's parliamentary system, it is hard to put in place and enforce the legal framework, since the framers of the law and the enforcers of the law and the overseers of the enforcement are one and the same (the party in power, or their agents, essentially).

Another widely used tool is the perjury law--lying to a law official. A lot of the time, things like interference or subversion are hard to prove, there is usually no paper or email trail. But a guilty person has to lie to protect himself, and usually a lie involves multiple individuals and therefore the liar is vulnerable to being caught in a lie. Many corrupt people end up in prison for lying during the investigation, even though there is not enough evidence for the actual corruption.

The point is, it is hard to imagine lok pal concept as being a meaningful solution to any problem. Whatever fine-tuning improvements in transparency and investigative independence can be achieved can be done without the necessity to introduce something like the lok pal. In India we have to mostly rely on the professionalism and integrity of the official culture, along with the culture of bureaucracy in which every action is documented by notings on a file, with some help from whistleblower protection laws etc. The checks and balances that derive from having a separate legislative and executive branch don't arise. In this aspect, Indian administration's model of full-career civil service officers is a detriment to exercise of independent judgment, compared with the US model where many civil servants especially in legal arena are there only for part of their career, and at the state level in many cases legal officials such as prosecutors and judges may have to go through election as well (varies from state to state). The election process is also a check, since it is an opportunity for the opponents to expose the official to close scrutiny.

Coming back to the Lok Pal approach, you can't just arbitrarily assert that it is independent; you have to show, at least based on reasonable expectation, how it would add to the currently existing level of independence of investigating agencies. I don't see any of the designers or supporters making an effort to demonstrate logically how lok pal can be expected to benefit the public; all I see is people having some knowledge of how administration is done today, creating "something" whimsical using those procedures and then "patching" that whimsical beast with further whimsy when obvious defects are pointed out, or taking a cop-out that nothing is perfect, something is better than nothing. That is not the way to approach the creation of a body that will have a lot of power over the citizens. You can't just assert that everything will be good and the investigation will be independent, without even a semblance of making a case that it would be so; you can't just posit that suddenly angelic unimpeachable people will take charge of everything on behalf of the corrupt masses and their corrupt political leaders. You have to approach the entire business of handing power to yet another lot of power seekers from the same old upper crust old-money segment of society (which gives rise most of the people who have the wherewithal in life to become "civil society") with extreme skepticism and caution, and insist on stringent checks and balances. Even without the peculiar class skew that is a feature of indian civil society, we have to build in mechanisms that will encourage flawed human beings to act with integrity.

Take, for instance the proposal to make Lok Pal self-funding from money seized from corrupt people. It does the exact opposite--encourages even good (sometimes 'good' means didn't have the opportunity yet to be bad) humans to behave like a mafia, biased towards prosecution in borderline cases, and possibly even in persecution of the innocent (who is going to oversee the lok pal since there isn't a super lok pal above them, and the voters have no voice? impeachment and dismissal processes are cumbersome and political, the retirement age will come and go before anything can be done).

One key aspect here is timely investigation, prosecution and conviction. Indian judicial system is atrociously understaffed, and the procedures are vastly in need of streamlining. A huge disincentive for bad behavior is the high probability of getting caught and convicted and sent to prison. That is not possible if the man hours for doing it are not available, and no one shows any interest in rectifying the situation. This is probably the single biggest practical factor that makes any number of super-duper lok pals a cruel joke whose net effect is only to put more marginally productive, usually mediocre caliber, self-important elites to ride on the back of ordinary abdul who is trying to build some wealth in an ethical way.

bottom line: I think the whole lok pal concept is a bad idea. No amount of recitation of procedural manuals, or claims and insinuations that lok pal proponents are somehow a superior class of person than ordinary abduls like me, will make it a good idea. I don't think this happens necessarily out of malice or ill intent, but I do think there is a lot of conditioning that established elites have to overcome before they become capable of even recognizing, let alone addressing, the issues and underlying concepts in an objective way.

I personally like the idea of citizens' grand juries or people's committees that are selected by lottery, get professional support, and have only a very limited tenure, 1 or 2 cases at the most. It won't be perfect, but it will mitigate many of the risks of the centralized lok pal. The big benefit I see is the prospect of building a core of ordinay abduls and ameenas that gradually start to understand how the country is run and how the people's servants are to be kept in line. It will be a good antidote to the group-thinking self-serving echo chamber that is the high-and-mighty civil society, which seems to be full of mediocre shallow people that can be undercut by someone of the caliber of Digvijay Singh or Manish Tiwari or Mani Shankar Aiyer.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 14 Jun 2011 13:18

About the black money & overseas bank accounts issue: there is a lot of discussion about tax laws, taxation rates and so on, and the presumption that putting money in overseas banks is done for investment purposes. We should remember that 'black money' is primarily undocumented money, and taxing money at whatever rate is a way for the state to find out where the money came from and where it is going. So, the purpose of stashing large sums in overseas banks is not just to 'save' money or get a better interest rate, though both benefits may accrue; often the real purpose is to have undocumented money for nefarious purposes such as terrorism, subverting the political and business processes etc. This is why it is anti-national and anti-social.

This has nothing to do with lok pal, and any government that is serious about national security should be doing everything possible to coerce the foreign banks to provide account information, based on proper court authorization etc.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 14 Jun 2011 13:47

somnath wrote:On top of all this, callous govts are thrown away in massive mandates during elections, while responsive ones are returned to power...In much greter intensities (just look at voting %s) than ever before..

It is not about being "inactive", it is about having a clear sense of proportion of what the issue is, what is required to be done to address it, and not cry "revolution" at every instance....

If you really want to talk about the appropriate approach to civic activism, here is the sequence-

1. First identify the top 3 / 4 causes you believe in. Typically these would be derived from an understanding of what your personal value system is (does not have to be related to any religion); and an understanding of the importance of these values (or lack of these) to the ecosystem.

2. Contribute to raising awareness of the issue / galvanize public opinion

3. Contribute to getting to a solution based on discussion with like-minded folks, once there is enough support for the cause

If you have contributed your mite on the Lokpal related suggestions - that is commendable. But do remember that your jumping to step 3 above has been on the back of several in India who have gone through step 1 and then spent years and years on step 2 - which has now enabled you and thousands of others to contribute their suggestions in a structured fashion directly in step 3. The folks who have been responsbile for galvanizing public opinion regarding corruption in India over the last several years include folks like AH, BR, Subramanium Swamy, Rahul Mehta (ex-BRFite) and many others.....

If several forumites here are calling for an end to Mainovadi ideology - it is because they are in the Step 2 stage which can last anywhere between a few months to several years in timeframe.

But more importantly the issues one chooses to identify with reveal a lot about a person. Your set of values under step 1 obviously compel you take an activist line on Salwa Judum and RSS - but the issue of protecting India's true liberal beliefs from exclusivist ideologies does not resonate with you.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 14 Jun 2011 13:59

KLNMurthy wrote:bottom line: I think the whole lok pal concept is a bad idea. No amount of recitation of procedural manuals, or claims and insinuations that lok pal proponents are somehow a superior class of person than ordinary abduls like me, will make it a good idea

I dont think anyone, least of all the Lokpal Bill itself, says that...I said this once before, the EC in India (not an animal you have in the US) is a classic case...The same bureaucrats who are supposedly (and often really) venal and kowtoing to every political flunkey, once on deputation on EC work (ven temprary ones during elections), becomes an exemplar of probity in conducting the elections...at the apex, even a somewhat "dodgy" appointment as CEC, Navin Chawla, played by the book...

Lokpal is an attempt to create such an institutional mechanism...As most people working in any organisation know, "reporting lines" make a lot of difference to outlooks and outcomes...Ditto for public offices..An independent institution with statutory mandates will be more efective than the current police-CBI-CVC-DIT framework, which is constitutionally subservient to the political executive...And contrary to what you say, an institution setup through an Act of Parliament is not "arbritrary or whimsical", it is deliberate and has institutional sanction...

Not sure why this "civil society" bit is such a red rag - the reps are only members of the "search committee", the body to shortlist applicants, not select them...Neither is membership of Lokpal itself defined in "civil society" terms...

You are also misreading the provisions...

KLNMurthy wrote:Take, for instance the proposal to make Lok Pal self-funding from money seized from corrupt people

Not at all - the Lokpal fund is not the funding vehicle for Lokpal...The funding for Lokpal omes from the Consolidated Fund of India - it is clearly stated in the Bill...The Lokpal fund is only a fund created out of fines levied by the Lokpal on convicted accused...Its not a main source of funding for the institution...

Further,

KLNMurthy wrote:Coming back to the Lok Pal approach, you can't just arbitrarily assert that it is independent; you have to show, at least based on reasonable expectation, how it would add to the currently existing level of independence of investigating agencies

Its doing precisely that by bringing CBI and some others under its tutelage..Today, CBI reports to the DoP&P, basically to the PM...Under this bill, it will report to the Lokpal - by definition, the level of independence has been altered...

KLNMurthy wrote:Indian judicial system is atrociously understaffed, and the procedures are vastly in need of streamlining. A huge disincentive for bad behavior is the high probability of getting caught and convicted and sent to prison.

This is true..But the issue on conviction isnt about lack of manhours, at least not in the visible ones involving high profile people..It is about quality of investigation - the courts repeatedly compain about shoddy investigation done by the police/CBI while giving rulings/judgements...And the quality of investigatoin is directly correlated to the level of independence...

Net net, if everything were working fine, we would not need a Lokpal..but then, not everything works fine all the time, and even when they seemingly do, they really dont...(compare bank regulation in UK to India - they had to move from the famed Gordon Brown "light touch" regulation to something more akin to RBI's post the crisis)...

KLNMurthy wrote:So, the purpose of stashing large sums in overseas banks is not just to 'save' money or get a better interest rate, though both benefits may accrue; often the real purpose is to have undocumented money for nefarious purposes such as terrorism, subverting the political and business processes etc

In terms of amounts, that is not true - the amounts required for terror crimes etc are amazingly small...Bulk of the "black oney generated is business income where the income-generator wants to not pay tax either because the tax rates are too high, or too cumbersome to comply with, or too full of loopholes encouraging people to avoid paying taxes...Further, black money does not remain "black", there is a constant circulation of money between black to white and back to black...

Therefore, the aproach to black money has to be strucural elimination of both incentives that encourage tax avoidance and disincentives on compliance...And as the Vijay Kelkar report says, a simpler tax regime is also one that is better enforced...If there were 2.5 big ideas to combat black money, they would be
1) GST and DTC - implement NOW
2) Stamp duty on real estate - find a way of abolishing it
2.5) A voluntary disclosure scheme on black money - its a debatable measure economically speaking, and to me has too many capital account related complications as well..But worth examining..

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 14 Jun 2011 14:40

Guys, we have wasted enough server space discussing these issues. The problem is, BRF, India and the world has not moved an inch against the menace of corruption, though few daring attempts to bring this to forefront have been made.

What is the issue?

India is a land laden by riches and God has made it self sufficient in every way possible. There is NO parallel to this land and culture. But yet our land is beset with abject poverty, malnutrition, and untapped potential. Now there is a sizable portion of populace which thinks or may I say which is convinced that corruption in our society is the biggest menace of all our problems. Plans and programs are made but are executed grossly inefficiently mainly because of the corrupt. Now the question is who will fight the corruption? The obvious answer is that in a democracy it is the elected, who should judge, discuss and provide solutions to the problems faced by the majority of our population. But in past 60 + years the system has failed to dislodge the menace itself. I have written this earlier, our democratic system was designed when Politicians were noble, prices were right and children used to respect their elders. Left onto itself the Indian democratic setup is not designed to hold anyone responsible and hence not designed to correct itself.

It is not that people of India have not punished the corrupt by way of ballot. There are many examples where people with allegation of corruption have been voted out. Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi, Laloo and many others. But some how corruption has not seen the beginning of it's end by these means. One crony gets replaced by another. It's like trying to fix your laptop which has a tendency if hanging, by again and again rebooting the system. The same story repeats itself over and over again.

Now for past 2 years I have seen my country stumble upon one scam to another. I remember how I used cringe my fist every morning about yet another fu_k up during the run up to CWG. It was like falling in a deep dark pit, every time you though it couldn't be worse than this or that, every time there was a bigger blow. The whole world laughed at me. Here I was thinking about being a citizen of superpower, and there there were people making super decent windfall profits on my expense. In my naivete there was a point I convinced myself that CWG will be better than what the Chinese could have done. ALAS, though corrupt, Chinese birathers have their priorities set right.

Then came the Adarsh scam. As a son of an EX military man and having studied in mostly Armed forces sponsored institutions, and as friend on very many who serve the Army and also schoolmate some who lost their lives in Kargil I felt like a kick in my guts. The chief of this very honorable institution was dirty dealing with politicians to secure personal favors.

Then the mother of all scams, 2G. In real numbers, this is what the CAG thought was the loss to exchequer Rs 1,75,00,00,00,00,000/-. This is a notional figure, the actual loss is disputed. But whatever number you take, it's going to out run the digit space on your calculator.

All this has happened in past 2 years. I have tried to put my faith in this system time and time again but system fails to respond.

My elected Government's head says he didn't act earlier because of coalition compulsions. So the democratic system failed. Now likes of AH / BRD tried to do something about it, but they were treated like hooligans. They are undemocratic / RSS / VHP / Saffron terror.

Somanth Ji, my faith in current system of governance is not there anymore. I don't think there is anyone more intellectual / smart / honest than MMS in the current political crowd, but yet he fails to deliver. What am I suppose to do?

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 14 Jun 2011 15:21

I don't think there is anyone more intellectual / smart / honest than MMS in the current political crowd, but yet he fails to deliver. What am I suppose to do?

Sri Ji, people are moaning the loss of money billions of USD to the exchequer. Right i agree..real cause of disgust.

But think a bit, if we started our reforms 7 years earlier, we'd be a 5 Trillion USD economy right now at the present growth rates?

We'd have a hundred million less poor right, IF we'd started reforms 7 years earlier?

We'd be generating 3 Trillion dollars worth more. And have a defense budget 3 times what it is now. Same with education and social sectors?

So who is responsible for this MASSIVE loss to the exchequer? 3 Trillion USD loss each year is much more than the entire speculated black money figures that people are crying hoarse on. The total loss would amount to 2o-25 trillion USD. That loss is real BIG!

Answer: Comes in policy misjudgement. People like Hazare from the Socialist left did everything in their power then to stall and oppose reforms. I remember being badgered in arguments mid 80's when i said that India needs to do away with the license raj, embrace reforms, free entrepreneurs, they retorted i remain clear that Corruption is India's biggest problem.. But people were still rallying behind the socialist left and the left was incessantly talking about corruption. None seeked the policy changes critically required. Only when the situation became dire we instituted reforms. But yet a 60 crore Bofors scandal was shaking the nation, much like this. Loosing hundreds of billions every year by delaying much needed reforms was not even considered. Those that talked about reform were hounded as anti-national and MNC supporters, willing to sell India.

But simple policy reform would have saved and earned India so much. Not seeking the correct policy reform that lends to more transparency, openness and competitiveness and focussing elsewhere might not also be the right decision. Would you call that lack of vision 'corrupt'?

amit · Post by **amit** » 14 Jun 2011 15:33

harbans wrote:I don't think there is anyone more intellectual / smart / honest than MMS in the current political crowd, but yet he fails to deliver. What am I suppose to do?

Sri Ji, people are moaning the loss of money billions of USD to the exchequer. Right i agree..real cause of disgust.

But think a bit, if we started our reforms 7 years earlier, we'd be a 5 Trillion USD economy right now at the present growth rates?

We'd have a hundred million less poor right, IF we'd started reforms 7 years earlier?

We'd be generating 3 Trillion dollars worth more. And have a defense budget 3 times what it is now. Same with education and social sectors?

So who is responsible for this MASSIVE loss to the exchequer? 3 Trillion USD loss each year is much more than the entire speculated black money figures that people are crying hoarse on. The total loss would amount to 2o-25 trillion USD. That loss is real BIG!

Answer: Comes in policy misjudgement. People like Hazare from the Socialist left did everything in their power then to stall and oppose reforms. I remember being badgered in arguments mid 80's when i said that India needs to do away with the license raj, embrace reforms, free entrepreneurs, they retorted i remain clear that Corruption is India's biggest problem.. But people were still rallying behind the socialist left and the left was incessantly talking about corruption. None seeked the policy changes critically required. Only when the situation became dire we instituted reforms. But yet a 60 crore Bofors scandal was shaking the nation, much like this. Loosing hundreds of billions every year by delaying much needed reforms was not even considered. Those that talked about reform were hounded as anti-national and MNC supporters, willing to sell India.

But simple policy reform would have saved and earned India so much. Not seeking the correct policy reform that lends to more transparency, openness and competitiveness and focussing elsewhere might not also be the right decision. Would you call that lack of vision 'corrupt'?

Harbans ji,

Great post and one worth reading.

The idea that any stick is good enough as long as you can beat your favourite scapegoats with it while good in the short term has its pit falls over the long term.

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 14 Jun 2011 15:35

Harbans Ji,

Lack of Vision, of course.

So you meant to Say PM lacks vision on corruption related issues? I am sorry am I missing something?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 14 Jun 2011 15:37

harbans wrote: Would you call that lack of vision 'corrupt'?

Err are you seriously, honestly, and meaningfully equating policy choice to deliberate acts of commission of loot?

Or are you trying to say that corruption is necessary to bring policy change like above?

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 14 Jun 2011 15:52

Err are you seriously, honestly, and meaningfully equating policy choice to deliberate acts of commission of loot?

Or are you trying to say that corruption is necessary to bring policy change like above?

Sanku Ji, neither. We abhor looting why? Because it's a loss to the exchequer. Pointing loss to the exchequer can also occur due other basics. By focusing wrongly and incorrectly on issues. By whatever means stupid, carelessness, direct loot a loss to the exchequer means exactly that, a loss.

As i said before, you can be dead honest here and Corrupt elsewhere. It depends. 'Corruption' is not some absolute. Put 90 % wealth tax above 5 laksh per annum or some figures, most here and you included will look to means to evade the tax. I.e become corrupt. What i do legally here at my home, i will be tied to a pole and flogged in public by Anna Ji. Different yardsticks no? Tomorrow you allow middlemen in defense deals or legalize betting in India, many 'corrupt' businessmen will become perfectly legitimate ones tomorrow. This issue will have to looked at much more dispassionately and objectively.

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 14 Jun 2011 16:10

Agree with you Harbans Ji. But is it happening? Is someone in GOI looking at corruption seriously. Or is there a plan, to bring in more transparency and accountability in the system by which loss to exchequer is controlled and leakages in the system are addressed? Is the current Government capable of bringing in these reforms? Is very thing OK? No need to worry onlee?

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 14 Jun 2011 16:18

harbans wrote:Sanku Ji, neither. We abhor looting why? Because it's a loss to the exchequer. Pointing loss to the exchequer can also occur due other basics. By focusing wrongly and incorrectly on issues. By whatever means stupid, carelessness, direct loot a loss to the exchequer means exactly that, a loss.

As i said before, you can be dead honest here and Corrupt elsewhere. It depends. 'Corruption' is not some absolute. Put 90 % wealth tax above 5 laksh per annum or some figures, most here and you included will look to means to evade the tax. I.e become corrupt. What i do legally here at my home, i will be tied to a pole and flogged in public by Anna Ji. Different yardsticks no? Tomorrow you allow middlemen in defense deals or legalize betting in India, many 'corrupt' businessmen will become perfectly legitimate ones tomorrow. This issue will have to looked at much more dispassionately and objectively.

Hi Harbansji,

My outlook is also very strongly pro-growth and pro-business, and I am very sympathetic to the notion that business should not be victimized in all this talk of corruption. In fact, if you look at my core themes on which I object to the Maino regime - corruption has rarely figured at the top. But the corruption sleaze certainly has been overwhelming and eye-opening over the past few months... Anyway, I have 2 points to make-

1. Corruption is primarily defined as 'misusing a public office for private gains'. So the primary focus of corruption and the Lokpal bill should be on the public servants who misuse their position, as the bribe-taker. The onus is much more on the bribe-taker than on the bribe-giver, given that the former are public servants misusing public trust. However, we cannot make it completely one-sided and the bribe-giver also has a certain responsibility.

Black-money and tax evasion does not strictly come under the definition of corruption...and in my view is not as serious a crime as corruption. But nevertheless the government does need to look at all avenues to retrieve any lost tax revenue - as long as the tax basis is at a reasonable 30 - 35% rate.

2. As regards non-implementation of pro-growth policies - we have had lengthy debates on this in the economic thread. Are you implying in any way that the INC is more pro-growth than the BJP? That is most certainly not correct. In fact if anybody is to blame for the lost years of growth it is the Gandhis, more specifically IG. Also in the current UPA dispensation - there has hardly been any movement over the last decade towards additional reforms which are very much required. MMS is a huge pro-growth voice - but the primary force holding him back has been internal - Sonia Gandhi's widely known leftist leanings.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 14 Jun 2011 16:21

harbans wrote: Sanku Ji, neither. We abhor looting why? Because it's a loss to the exchequer.

Ummm, no. Its wrong on many counts, loss of exchequer being a small part of the whole issue.

Pointing loss to the exchequer can also occur due other basics.

I am sorry, that sounds awful like torn shirt open fly debate. In any case its not only about loss to exchequer but many related issues, but even if we were to accept for a moment that its only that, there is no gain saying in saying that other problems exist.

Sure other problems exist, but most Indians identify corruption as most serious of the problem.

Tomorrow you allow middlemen in defense deals or legalize betting in India, many 'corrupt' businessmen will become perfectly legitimate ones tomorrow

Well, sure but that a cart before horse argument, because we can not stop corruption we should not start legalizing means of corruption.

Sure whether we need to free up our draconian systems is a debate in itself, as well as dismantle the licencse quota and permit raj -- with monstrosities such a NREGA.

However that can certainly happen in parallel to other measures of transparency and accountability.

I hardly see a conflict.

. This issue will have to looked at much more dispassionately and objectively.

It is being looked at disspassionately and objectively frankly, just that people HAVE come up with answers and the RIGHT steps are being blocked by VESTED intrests.

Thats all there is to it frankly.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 14 Jun 2011 17:12

Arjun Ji, yes i am aware that you're pro-growth. The biggest problem with 'corruption' is that transparency and openness have yet to seep into our political culture and hence governance. Some steps have been taken, but many are needed. There are no quick fix solutions really. All sorts of people join the public service. Most of them from us only. Most seek perks, jobs security and personal benefits from these sectors when they join. We are unable to do away with that aspect. Social compulsions then draw them into abusing the system for further gains. They are well entrenched in this system. Groups and clans clamor for reservations to join these sectors. All of them come from our society, not some alien one.

Are you implying in any way that the INC is more pro-growth than the BJP? That is most certainly not correct. In fact if anybody is to blame for the lost years of growth it is the Gandhis, more specifically IG. Also in the current UPA dispensation - there has hardly been any movement over the last decade towards additional reforms which are very much required. MMS is a huge pro-growth voice - but the primary force holding him back has been internal - Sonia Gandhi's widely known leftist leanings.

No sir, i am not INC or anyone for that matter. I'm pro-reform, pro-transparency, pro-growth. BR for example from his site wants this:

100% boycott of foreign companies, adoption of ‘swadeshi’

Then i become worried when people are just about ready to rally around anyone with some kind of popular appeal, irrespective of what kind of policies one has. Because if we go back to such agendas and policies we may as well stop worrying about the Raja's, Kalmadi's or corruption for that matter etc. We're going to face poverty and massive massive loss to the exchequer. That's why i mentioned the loss due to policy initiatives. Perspective sake.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 14 Jun 2011 17:19

harbans wrote:
100% boycott of foreign companies, adoption of ‘swadeshi’
Then i become worried when people are just about ready to rally around anyone with some kind of popular appeal, irrespective of what kind of policies one has. .

I think it would incorrect to assume that the rallying around any particular entity or a platform means that all its povs are blindly accepted.

They key points in the current satyagraha are

1) Accountability
2) Strong and quick measures for punishing the guilty
3) Stop the loss of money from the country.

I do not think that if BR/AH asked people to do a dharna to ensure that onlee Neem be used to brush teeth will he get the cross spectrum support that he gets today.

While its important to look at other details, it does not do to stumble over third order issues and miss the very basic ones.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 14 Jun 2011 17:19

But is it happening? Is someone in GOI looking at corruption seriously. Or is there a plan, to bring in more transparency and accountability in the system by which loss to exchequer is controlled and leakages in the system are addressed? Is the current Government capable of bringing in these reforms? Is very thing OK? No need to worry onlee?

Sri Ji, too early to say here really. But i do think that the GOI is on the backfoot. It's pretty clear that there is disgust. Why i gave that example is that bad policy can lead to loss in exchequer, perpetuate poverty much more than the corruption figures. We also don't want people to ride on the disgust people express and force in backward policies at some stage. Hitler came in power in Germany early 30's exactly on German peoples disgust at the Treaty of Versailles. Loss in exchequer due to bad policy > loss in exchequer due to corruption.

Presently you can see even here, there are lots of discussion, pressure on the GOI to act. So IMHO there is going to be change. The next election plank is going to be on corruption. But it's also prudent for us, to see that policies that promote growth, transparency are not sacrificed at the altar.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 14 Jun 2011 17:26

harbans wrote:Tomorrow you allow middlemen in defense deals or legalize betting in India, many 'corrupt' businessmen will become perfectly legitimate ones tomorrow

Its a good point...I had mentioned somewhere before about the phenomenon of "smuggling", primarily gold...Haji Mastan was (in)famous for that, and Pran/Prem Chopra/Ajit made careers out of that! Once gold imports were legalised with a moderate tax regime (by MMs, in 1993), the smuggling too disappeared, along with the criminal aspects of it...

Which is why I keep reiterating that the real fight is in the domain of tax policy (for black money) and governance reforms (for corruption)...

There is bipartisan culpability on the latter - the telecom policy and the regulator, for example, has been kept in a muddle by successive governments since 1998 - Raja's payoffs were higher than Pramod Mahajan's (whose death was a huge boon to the BJP, btw) simply because he presided over an industry 10 times bigger...

What is really surprising has been UPAII's rank dysfunctionalism, given that UPAI had some solid reforms to its credit, notwithstanding (and in some case because of) the Left...The RTI Act was one - a huge boost to accountability - a lot of skeletons coming out today have their origins in the empowerment of the citizen through RTI...NREGS was the second...Forest Dwellers Act was a third, less visible one...The nuclear deal was the signing off "deal"...

UPAII therefore, ws expected to take up the mantle of the difficult reforms - Land Acqusition, GST, DCT, telecom regulation, as well as the new approaches to social sector like the Food Security Act...Surprisingly, the govt has done nothing on anything, including pet Sonia Gandhi projects like the Food Security Act...It actually begs the question on how much influence SG really has, contrary to the all pervasive influence credited to her by some...Barring the UID initiative, the govt has done really nothing material...

Unlike what sloganeers love to shout, neither corruption nor black money can be structurally tackled by stuff like death penalty or "natioanlisation"...The solutions are in the policy domain, largely economic...And while the objectives are clerly identified, implementation is a hard grinding legislative process..Unfortunately, that reality has been missed by most of the cacaphony today (barring Anna/Arvind inittive on Lokpal), and the govt is effectively off the kosh on the same...Which is the unfortuanet deal...

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 14 Jun 2011 18:01

harbans wrote:Then i become worried when people are just about ready to rally around anyone with some kind of popular appeal, irrespective of what kind of policies one has. Because if we go back to such agendas and policies we may as well stop worrying about the Raja's, Kalmadi's or corruption for that matter etc. We're going to face poverty and massive massive loss to the exchequer. That's why i mentioned the loss due to policy initiatives. Perspective sake.

That is a good point...

And the issue is that both BR and AH are becoming political figures while we know very little about their policies outside of corruption. I agree with you that stuff like death penalty for offenders etc is completely off the wall, and frankly I expect that to be just sloganeering which does not have any realistic hope nor should have any hope of coming to light.

Between AH and BR, on general pro-business mentality - I would actually expect BR to be more pro-business then AH. AH and his gang - especially that Bhushan family, seem to have the standard leftist, ant-business mindset. As regards BR, what gives me hope is that he is very much a successful entrepreneur himself. I would want him to be pro-Indian business, but somebody would have to make him see the sense that if India goes 'swadeshi' and stops imports that would mean that other nations can stop Indian goods and services (including yoga classes). The difference between the India of today and the India of yester-years is that there was little confidence in Indian export ability earlier - while the situation is the opposite today. If you are confident about your exports, it follows that you cannot afford to artificially limit imports given the inter-dependent world we live in.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 14 Jun 2011 18:13

Don't see why questioning the civil society, and its references in the draft - is such a red rag! Why read so much into this questioning?

It was of course perhaps mere small omission, not deliberate at all, not to bold the

The selections shall be made preferably through consensus.

before

Provided that if three or more members of search committee, for reasons to be recorded in writing, object to the selection of any member, he shall not be selected.
f. Search committee shall recommend three times the names as there are vacancies to the selection committee.

the word used is "preferable" - something that is sought to be passed off as "binding". Consider that only two members object, this breaks down "consensus". What happens then? Do they vote? Nothing has been specified.

As was pointed out by me, the search committee can populate its list with "civil society" after maintaining the quotas [I have quoted explicitly the procedure and the "qualifications" to show that such a "population" cannot be stopped within the given framework, and I have further given examples how more than one qualifications can be used to enlist candidates who satisfy both the "legal background" as well as "civil society" with impeccable "qualifications"].

g. Selection committee shall select such number of candidates as there are vacancies to the Prime Minister. The selections shall be made preferably through consensus.
Provided that if three or more members of selection committee, for reasons to be recorded in writing, object to the selection of any member, he shall not be selected.

So much shouting about "selection committee" "selecting" the Lokpal members. Let us recollect the sarcastic harangue about "SC judges" being "selected". So the search committee sends up 3x names for x vacancies, where 0<x<=10. Suppose no "civil society" approved "civil servant" is found, or there are already two civil servants in the Lokpal, at most two of 3x needs to be conceded to "un-civil society". The remaining 3x-2 can come from "civil society". So the selection committee is left with choosing from this 3x-2 the remaining x [or x-1, x-2 depending on the case].

As pointed out before, the selection committee can object to all members of the list in theory. It is not written down in this wonderful set of procedures as to what happens then. Is the list returned to the search committee? Are they asked to search again? Or since none of that is written out, is it implied that they have to submit to a "consensus" from within the list?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 14 Jun 2011 18:16

Arjun wrote:
harbans wrote:Then i become worried when people are just about ready to rally around anyone with some kind of popular appeal, irrespective of what kind of policies one has. Because if we go back to such agendas and policies we may as well stop worrying about the Raja's, Kalmadi's or corruption for that matter etc. We're going to face poverty and massive massive loss to the exchequer. That's why i mentioned the loss due to policy initiatives. Perspective sake.
That is a good point...

And the issue is that both BR and AH are becoming political figures while we know very little about their policies outside of corruption. I agree with you that stuff like death penalty for offenders etc is completely off the wall, and frankly I expect that to be just sloganeering which does not have any realistic hope nor should have any hope of coming to light.

Between AH and BR, on general pro-business mentality - I would actually expect BR to be more pro-business then AH. AH and his gang - especially that Bhushan family, seem to have the standard leftist, ant-business mindset. As regards BR, what gives me hope is that he is very much a successful entrepreneur himself. I would want him to be pro-Indian business, but somebody would have to make him see the sense that if India goes 'swadeshi' and stops imports that would mean that other nations can stop Indian goods and services (including yoga classes). The difference between the India of today and the India of yester-years is that there was little confidence in Indian export ability earlier - while the situation is the opposite today. If you are confident about your exports, it follows that you cannot afford to artificially limit imports given the inter-dependent world we live in.

I have posted some tehelka reportage on the Bhushans. Is more available on their profile? We do need to understand all those involved in the Lokpal campaign, and what their motivations or future tendencies will be, isn't it?

sanjeevpunj · Post by **sanjeevpunj** » 14 Jun 2011 18:17

A small poem for the occasion

Gandhiji ka chashma gayab
Lalu mal bhi gaya kidhar, kab
Ramdev ne kiya satyagraha
Congress neta karenge kya ab?

Anna Hazare phir se pukare
Aao naya ek desh banaye
Press bhi ho gayi ek kinare
Janta behaal bhookh ke mare

Garmi badhti jayegi
Barish ab kab aayegi
Kya Lok Pal Bill aayega
Ya yoonhi phir gum ho jayega?