Twelve years on, government sections weigh changes to Lokpal law for smoother functioning
Government sources told TOI that the intent and architecture of the law remains strong, but some ambiguities and wide discretionary powers are affecting the Lokpal’s efficiency.
“The ambiguities may have been unintentional and discretion may have been exercised in good faith in framing the law,” a government official was quoted as saying.
Concerns about the functioning of banks
One of the most notable concerns is about how the Lokpal hears complaints.
Although the law provides for multiple benches to promote division of labour, the current chairman, Justice AM Khanwilkar, has preferred to preside over all cases in a single bench comprising all members. Section 16(1)(a) of the Act states that “the jurisdiction of the Lokpal may be exercised by benches” and gives discretion to the president to constitute benches.
The previous president, Justice (Retd) Pinaki Chandra Ghose, had constituted multiple benches, but Khanwilkar’s approach stems from his preference for all members to decide each complaint collectively. However, officials quoted by TOI argued that this could limit different judicial perspectives and slow down the disposal of cases, which would otherwise be concluded faster with multiple panels. The report also states that the president has shown reluctance to send case files through the Lokpal secretary, raising concerns about procedural deviations.
Debate over surveillance and enforcement powers
The Lokpal has the power to take up corruption complaints against the prime minister, ministers, MPs and government officials, but cannot initiate investigations on its own.
Another issue under discussion is whether the Lokpal retains the power to override “competent authority” while deciding on sanction for prosecution. “There is a view that the authority is in a better position to take this call,” a government official told TOI.
Although the law allows the Lokpal to run its investigation and prosecution wings independently, it is yet to be established. Instead, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) currently carry out these functions under Lokpal supervision. According to sources cited in the report, both institutions already have the institutional capacity, manpower and investigative experience, raising questions about whether separate wings are necessary.
Scope of preliminary examination
The law allows the Lokpal to investigate officials at any stage, including shortly after receiving a complaint; This is something CBI and CVC usually do not do at the preliminary investigation stage.
An official cited in the report said the law seeks to balance integrity in public service with the need to allow officials to carry out their duties without intimidation.
“The purpose of the law is to strike a balance between honesty and allowing a public servant to discharge their duties freely without the sword of scrutiny hanging over them. The examination before the PI risks losing the reputation of the defendant,” the official said.
