JOIN USA bill to amend the Lokpal Act to give government a greater say in prosecution matters and also tweak the composition of the panel to select the chairperson and members of the anti-graft ombudsman was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Thursday.
The Lokpal and Lokayuktas and Other Related Laws (Amendment) Bill, introduced by Union Minister for Personnel Jitendra Singh, seeks to include the leader of the single largest party in Opposition in the Lok Sabha as a member of the Search Committee.
The amendment was necessitated as there is no Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha as the Congress failed to get the mandatory 10 per cent seats – 54 – to be eligible for the post.
The bill also seeks to set eligibility criteria for the selection the of Director of Prosecution (DoP), who will head the Directorate of Prosecution. An officer from the Indian Legal Service holding the position of a joint secretary or a person who has been in practice as an advocate for 15 years and has the experience of handling cases on behalf of the government, may be eligible to hold the post.
In a bid to ensure functional independence to the DoP, the government has inserted two new sub-sections to the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act. It states that in case of difference of opinion between the CBI director and the DoP, the matter shall be referred to the Attorney General of India for his advice and such advice shall be binding.
The second sub-section makes it clear that the annual performance appraisal report of the DoP shall be recorded and maintained in the Ministry of Law and Justice.
The new clause makes the A-G’s opinion “binding” on the CBI in case there is a difference of views between the director of the probe agency and the DoP. By making the A-G’s opinion binding, the Centre will be in a position to have its view prevail on the agency, particularly in sensitive cases, thus questioning the independence of the CBI.
Last year, the Supreme Court had called the CBI a “caged parrot” of the Centre. Hearing the coalgate case, the apex court had expressed strong displeasure at the then UPA government’s interference in the coal scam probe.