Parliamentary panel pulls up Centre for delay in bill to give autonomy to CBI

The government had given an assurance in Rajya Sabha about bringing a Bill to provide autonomy for the CBI nine years ago, and again four years ago

The government has come under criticism from a Parliamentary panel for not finalising a bill to provide autonomy to the CBI and setting up an independent agency to manage assets seized by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

While the government has given an assurance in Rajya Sabha about bringing a Bill to provide autonomy for the CBI nine years ago, a similar promise was made on the floor of the House on setting up an independent agency to manage seized assets four years ago.

Now, Rajya Sabha’s Committee on Government Assurances headed by AIADMK MP M Thambidurai has expressed “displeasure” over not acting upon the assurances given on the floor of the House. The committee has “expressed its displeasure over the fact that the Ministry (of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions) had side-tracked the core issue” by furnishing an “evasive and vague” implementation report. It asked the Ministry to provide details and status of the draft bill.

The government had in a written response to a question in Rajya Sabha on August 8, 2013 said that it has “not yet finalised” the draft bill for providing autonomy to the CBI. This response was considered as an assurance made on the floor of the House, which needed to be fulfilled, to finalise the draft bill.

In its implementation report, the Ministry said it has amended the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 to set up a Select Committee for choosing a CBI Director, setting up a Directorate of Prosecution and appointment of senior officers by a panel headed by the Chief Vigilance Commissioner.

The committee said the Ministry had been seeking extensions of time on the ground that the draft bill had been sent to the Department-related committee and was also being considered by the Inter-Ministerial Group. But the implementation report was silent on the issue of whether the draft bill had been “finalised or not”.

On a question on an independent agency for managing assets seized by the ED, the Ministry of Finance had spoken about a proposal to engage an independent agency for managing the confirmed attached immovable properties under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

In its implementation report, the Ministry said the ED was in discussion with a Public Sector Enterprise NBCC for “management, maintenance and security” of seized assets. Several meetings were held between NBCC, ED and the Department of Revenue. Later it was decided to take up a pilot project in Chennai.

According to the panel, more than four years have lapsed since the assurance was made on the floor of the House but the final decision regarding the independent agency has not been arrived at yet.

The committee wanted the Ministry to expedite the process for appointing the agency.