Being law minister, Mr T.B. Jayachandra often has to defend the indefensible. The recent constitution of the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) has attracted a lot of criticism and the government drafted Mr Jayachandra to defend itself during the recent Legislature session. In an interview with Deccan Chronicle, Mr Jayachandra felt that honest young police officers would bring about a real change through Anti-Corruption Bureau. Here are excerpts of his interview.
Can you elaborate who mooted the idea of creating Anti-Corruption Bureau?
This started in the Belagavi session. When issues pertaining to former Lokayukta Justice Bhaskar Rao and the extortion scam involving his son came up in the Belagavi session, I assured the House that we would come out with a comprehensive bill.
The natural choice before me was to go back to the system adopted at the all India level. We decided to bring a Lok Pal model here. I consulted other leaders and they too agreed.
But the opposition parties took objection to it. So, we changed the plan and brought an amendment to the removal of Lokayukta Act. But, a major problem happened.
Thousands of applications were pending before the Lokayukta. There are cases pending since 2009. Justice Venugopal Gowda said that since a vigilance cell can ease the pressure on Lokayukta, it is better to create a vigilance cell.
So, we decided to create the Anti-Corruption Bureau adopting the all India pattern. The intention is to strengthen the Lokayukta institution. If there is a judge heading it (Lokayukta), can we presume it is the best choice?
You know what happened after Justice Santosh Hegde(former Lokayukta) laid down office. People cannot even speak about the functioning of the institution because they are afraid of judges. There is nothing wrong in separating the police wing. No politician is behind the move nor do we shield anyone.
This Anti-Corruption Bureau system depends on political masters. If the individuals who comes to power are good, then the chances of the ACB working well cannot be ruled out. But instead of creating an individual-centric institution, the existing Lokayukta institution could have been strengthened..
When judges head the institution, we can’t speak. If the Anti-Corruption Bureau is headed by police officers, we can discuss their conduct in the Legislature. The media can comment on their style of functioning. This question arises only when it is weakened. We are here to strengthen it. You will see in time.
The question is about corruption in the bureaucracy. Officials posted to Anti-Corruption Bureau are likely to protect corrupt officials. So, the whole idea of eradicating corruption will be defeated..
What was happening till now? Lokayukta police are also our people.
But the Lokayukta having administrative control over the police would be a better system than the Anti-Corruption Bureau..
It (Lokayukta controlling police) could work both ways. We had given administrative powers and the power of writing confidential reports to Lokayukta. What happened? What did the judges do? If the Anti-Corruption Bureau goes out of control, people can discuss it. We have vigilance cells in all departments which work as a deterrent.
Senior leaders like former Chief Minister S.M. Krishna and former Union minister B. Janardhan Poojary expressed their opinion against this. Do you mean to say, they were misled on the creation of ACB?
After interacting with me, many were convinced. We are getting a lot of feedback on social media. Whatever criticism we received, we have to prepare answers and put them in the public domain.
Then, where does your initiative to bring an comprehensive bill to strengthen the anti-corruption mechanism stand?
Even the Assembly Speaker had suggested it. We have fixed a meeting with floor leaders in the Legislature to discuss the issue.
The impression in civil society is that whenever Congress comes to power, it weakens institutions to encourage corruption. The previous UPA regime at the Centre got into it. This one (creation of ACB) will unleash similar charges against your government?
In the short term, such an impression may prevail. We have to address it. If they (officials at ACB) start taking action effectively, people will start comparing the situation of having the Lokayukta versus ACB. We can make people believe that we can bring change. We have to be effective and wipe out the image.
Former chief minister, H.D. Kumaraswamy and BJP state president, Pralhad Joshi had written letters to AICC president Sonia Gandhi on this issue. Has any direction come from Delhi?
I don't think so. The media will always write that the Congress high command is upset with this and that. They(high command) never interfere in government affairs in states where the Congress is in power.
This time, they may intervene if they are convinced that your move is going to damage your party’s image.
No. See, we have the chief minister and party president. Then we have the All India Congress Committee General Secretary in-charge of the state. They will discuss this. We keep updating them. Why does Mr Joshi (Bharatiya Janata Party’s state unit president) not write to his party top brass to set right the anomalies in the Lokayukta in BJP ruled Gujarat?
Fifteen states which have ACBs, failed to contain corruption. So, the ACBs are a failed option. Precisely for this reason, civil society might have opposed the constitution of ACB....
No. Our Lokayukta has powers to fight maladminstration, inefficiency and delay. We have not withdrawn the powers (of Lokayukta). If we had touched them, they could have criticized us. We have good officers, we can make the system effective.
Finally, your government failed to table the Anwar Manippady report on alleged misuse of wakf property by political bigwigs in the Upper House.
(Smiles) Let us see on Monday. Clause 10/2 of the Minority Development Act, is very clear.
The presiding officer’s ruling(that the Manippady report should be tabled in the House) is binding on the government.
In the light of the Chairman’s ruling, we have a lot of precedents and procedures. We may appeal to him to reconsider his ruling.
