Lokpal Consensus

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s rare interaction with five Editors on Wednesday has shed light on some of the current issues facing the country. At the top of the heap is the all important Lokpal Bill where a group of civil society members led by Anna Hazare is having dialogue with government of India representatives led by senior Minister Pranab Mukherjee. As rightly pointed out by the Prime Minister, there is a need for a “national consensus” on the Lokpal issue and he is also correct when he says that no group should try to impose themselves or consider their views as the “last word”. The PM was obviously referring to the difference of opinions between the government and civil society representatives on the draft of the Lokpal Bill. There is no point in taking a confrontationist approach. Rather there is a need to reason things out and see what is workable, effective and within the basic feature of the constitution. It is good that Team Anna is meeting up with the political parties as the former is aware that any draft of the Lokpal Bill will have to get approval of Parliament. Therefore what the PM has suggested for a national consensus is the right way to go about things.
One of the big disagreements is obviously on the question of whether to bring the office of the Prime Minister under the purview of the Lokpal. The old and tested view is that the PM should be outside the Lokpal while the more progressive and also popular view is that the PM’s office should come within the Lokpal’s purview. Political parties in particular should take a proper view of the pros and cons involved and make constructive suggestion rather than going with the popular slogan of having the PM under the Lokpal. At the end of the day it is not only about the person of the PM but rather the institution that we are talking about. Today the PM is from the Congress. Tomorrow it may be the BJP or some other party. Whether to have the PM under or outside the Lokpal involves the question of Constitution, Parliament, political stability, people’s mandate, elections and other ramifications. It cannot be taken as simply a done thing because it involves other intuitions and processes. More importantly India follows a parliamentary democracy system and here the PM can continue to remain in office as long as he/she has the confidence of the Lok Sabha (Parliament). The PM can be removed or resign if he/she is voted out in a no confidence motion. Whether a PM (or Chief Minister in the case of a State) can be asked to quit his office even if he enjoys the confidence of the Lok Sabha is something extraordinary and therefore a proper understanding and consultation will be needed before finalizing this part of the Lokpal Bill.       
Yes many of the points or provisions being pushed by the civil society will be ‘out of the box’ ideas. This is welcome as governments would usually favour less change and more of the status-quo. By having such out of the box ideas, there is going to be some sort of checks and balances between the draft prepared by the civil society and government. There is therefore a strong case for bringing about a more progressive and forward looking legislation. However at the same time, the problem seems to be that sometimes progressive ideas will tend to be over idealistic and therefore not in tune with practical reality. At the end of the day in order to arrive at a consensus both the government and team Hazare will have to concede on some of the points of contention. And also the comments by the PM that the Lokpal Bill was essential and desirable but not a panacea, only goes to tell that the fight against corruption will have to go beyond the Lokpal institution.