BENGALURU: The state government’s decision to amend the Lokayukta Act, with changes proposed in appointment of the Lokayukta and Upa Lokayukta, and their functioning has been criticized by legal experts—former judges and senior advocates—who felt such a move would only weaken the institution rather than allow those occupying these posts to function with independence and integrity.
“What do they want? A your’s obediently as the Lokayukta?” asked a retired judge, wondering why the government was in such a hurry to amend the Lokayukta Act, without a public debate on the pros and cons of changes proposed in the Act.
Former Lokayukta Justice Shivraj Patil said any amendment should be to strengthen the institution of Lokayukta rather than dilute its powers, and must be in the interest of people. “The amendment must keep in view the independence of those occupying the posts of Lokayukta and Upalokayukta so that they are free to act fearlessly, otherwise they will become vulnerable and function with fear. The government must not amend the Act keeping in mind the present situation and person, but the consequences in future. For more than 30 years, people of our state have turned to the institution of Lokayukta with all sorts of grievances, not just complaints of corruption. In fact, corruption constitutes a miniscule part of its duties. So, if the government restricts the powers of Lokayukta to address only complaints of corruption, then the vigilance commission or the local police can handle these cases,” he added.
Former high court judge and senior advocate Ravi B Naik said the proposed amendment could be another attempt to “Shield the corrupt.” “With regard to the proposed amendment in respect of permission for sanction of prosecution of the Chief Minister, MLAs and officers, it will further complicate the functioning of the Lokayukta, who will then have a limited role,” he added.
Former Advocate General Ashok Harnahalli said: “There was always a demand for more power to the Lokayukta but the proposed amendment will restrict his power.” On his part, Supreme Court advocate, K.V. Dhananjay, said an Act should not be amended to address every aberration. “There are more important things to do: there is just one Lokayukta judge. Appoint more judges and secure more convictions, preferably of corrupt ministers in the state cabinet,” he added.
