Moa Jamir
After the rather unceremonious exit of the last Nagaland Lokayukta, we have argued that it is imperative to appoint a new one at the earliest as it is one the crucial steps towards engendering transparency and accountability in the system of governance in the State.
As reported in this newspaper today, nearly six months down the line, the State Government is in no mood to appoint a new one. It in fact, seems to be planning a way out of the provision dealing with vacancy of Lokayukta in the Nagaland Lokayukta Act, 2017 by introducing an ‘Amendment to the Act’ and perhaps, escape scrutiny.
Nagaland Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio will be introducing ‘The Nagaland Lokayukta Act (Amendment No 2) Bill, 2021” on the opening day of the Eighth Session of 13th Nagaland Legislative Assembly on August 3.
The Nagaland Lokayukta Act mandated that any “vacancy occurring in the office of the Lokayukta or Upa-Lokayukta by reason of his/her death, resignation, retirement or removal-shall be filled in as soon as possible, but not later than six months from the date of occurrence of such vacancy.”
As per its website, the ‘Term of Office’ of the first Nagaland Lokayukta is given as ‘22nd Feb 2019-5th Feb 2021’ and accordingly, the deadline for appointing a new Lokayukta (not later than six months) is almost up. Thus, August 5 is the deadline.
This can be construed as a deliberate attempt to delay the matter and a big disenchantment for those fighting for accountability and probity in public office and advocating transparency in governance.
If the State Government, at least, had given an iota of importance to appoint a new head of the State’s top anti-corruption watchdog or streamline the Act itself, it should have already undertaken the process in February, during the NLA budget session.
However, unlike the enthusiasm seen when the Nagaland Government filed a Writ Petition (Civil) in the Supreme Court asking for the removal of the then Nagaland Lokayukta amid the COVID-19 pandemic in August 2020, the sense of urgency in appointing a new one has been conspicuously missing after the matter was ‘successfully’ adjudicated in the apex court in the first week of February, 2021.
This raises several questions regarding transparency as well as accountability and even put serious misgiving about the State Government’s intention of implementing the Nagaland Lokayukta Act in both letter and in the spirit; and simply elicits the question: Is the government serious about dealing with corruption?
Despite everything, taking its ‘First Annual Report 2019-20’ at face value, the office of the Nagaland Lokayukta has brought about a semblance of an ample ombudsman for accountability in the state, and must have had caused discomfiture to those at the helms of affairs.
As noted earlier in this column, the State Government has cited acts of impropriety’ and preservation of ‘institutional integrity” as a reason seeking the removal of the previous incumbent. It is reiterated that to preserve the ‘institutional integrity,’ it is also imperative that the State Government appoints a new Lokayukta without delay. A strong anti-corruption watchdog is pertinent for any political and governmental set-up.
The State Government must make its priority clear. For any feedback, drop a line to jamir.moa@gmail.com
