Lokpal and Lokayuktas

At a Glance

• What it is The Ombudsman institutions for the Centre and the states
• Act Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013
• Lokpal members Chairperson and up to 8 members; 50% judicial
• State bodies Lokayuktas by state law within 365 days
• Exam link UPSC Prelims, Polity: Non-Constitutional Bodies

Where Does It Fit?

This is the fifth topic of the category on Non-Constitutional Bodies. The Lokpal and Lokayukta are India’s Ombudsman institutions, recommended by the First Administrative Reforms Commission (1966-70) and established by the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, after ten official attempts to legislate.

The Ombudsman Idea

The Ombudsman was first created in Sweden in 1809; Ombud is a Swedish term for a representative or spokesman. Donald Rowat defines it as an officer appointed by the legislature to handle complaints against administrative and judicial action. The Swedish Ombudsman deals with abuse of administrative discretion, maladministration, administrative corruption, nepotism and discourtesy. It can act on a complaint or suo motu, can prosecute erring officials including judges, but cannot inflict punishment or quash a decision. The institution spread to Finland (1919), Denmark (1955) and Norway (1962); New Zealand was the first Commonwealth country to adopt it in 1962, and the United Kingdom did so in 1967. Other devices for citizens’ grievances are the French Administrative Courts and the Procurator system of socialist countries. The Ombudsman in India is called Lokpal and Lokayukta.

Recommendation and Legislative Attempts

The First Administrative Reforms Commission (1966-70) recommended a Lokpal and a Lokayukta on the pattern of the Scandinavian Ombudsman and New Zealand’s Parliamentary Commissioner. The Lokpal would deal with complaints against ministers and secretaries at the Centre and in the states, and the Lokayukta with other specified higher officials. The ARC kept the judiciary outside their purview, as in New Zealand. The Government of India accepted the recommendation, yet bills lapsed or were withdrawn nine times.

Salient Features of the 2013 Act

1. Establishes the Lokpal at the Centre and Lokayuktas in the states; the Lokpal’s jurisdiction includes the Prime Minister (with subject matter exclusions and a specific process), ministers, MPs and Group A, B, C and D officers of the Central government.
2. The Lokpal has a chairperson and a maximum of 8 members, of which 50% are judicial members, and 50% come from SCs, STs, OBCs, minorities and women.
3. Selection by a committee of the Prime Minister, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, the Chief Justice of India or a nominated Supreme Court judge and an eminent jurist nominated by the President, assisted by a Search Committee.
4. Power of superintendence and direction over any investigating agency including the CBI for cases referred by it, and a high-powered committee chaired by the Prime Minister recommends the CBI Director.
5. Provisions for attachment and confiscation of property acquired by corrupt means even while prosecution is pending.
6. Timelines: preliminary enquiry three months extendable by three months; investigation six months extendable by six months at a time; trial one year extendable by one year, through special courts.
7. Maximum punishment under the Prevention of Corruption Act raised from seven to ten years, with minimum three years under sections 7, 8, 9 and 12 and two years under section 15.
8. Institutions financed fully or partly by the government are covered, but aided institutions are excluded; entities receiving foreign donations under FCRA above Rs 10 lakh a year are covered.
9. Lokpal can grant sanction for prosecution, and the Act strengthens the CBI through a Directorate of Prosecution, a panel of advocates and funds.
10. States must set up Lokayuktas by law within 365 days, with freedom on the contours of the mechanism.

Drawbacks Noted

The Lokpal cannot proceed suo motu against any public servant. The Act emphasises the form of complaint over substance, and heavy punishment for false and frivolous complaints may deter complaints. Anonymous complaints are not allowed. A public servant against whom a complaint is filed gets legal assistance. There is a limitation period of seven years to file complaints, and the procedure for complaints against the Prime Minister is seen as very non-transparent.

Lokayuktas in the States

Many states set up Lokayuktas before the 2013 Act. Odisha passed the Act first, in 1970, but the institution was established first in Maharashtra in 1971. The structure varies: some states have a Lokayukta and an Upalokayukta, others only a Lokayukta. The Governor appoints them. Judicial qualifications are prescribed in some states and not in others. In most states the term is five years or age 65, whichever is earlier. Jurisdiction varies: the Chief Minister is included in some states and excluded in others, ministers and higher civil servants are included in almost all, members of state legislatures in some, and local bodies, corporations, companies and societies in most. In most states the Lokayukta can act on a complaint or suo motu. In some states grievances as well as allegations are covered, in others only corruption allegations. The Lokayukta reports annually to the Governor, who places the report before the legislature, and its recommendations are advisory and not binding.

Why Is This Topic Important?

• Anti-corruption theme Regularly asked in Prelims and Mains
• 2013 Act features Composition and timelines are common
• State variation Lokayukta differences are tested

What Came Next?

The next topic covers the National Commission for Women.

Key People and Terms

• Ombudsman Officer to handle citizens’ complaints
• Lokpal Central Ombudsman
• Lokayukta State Ombudsman
• Search Committee Assists the Selection Committee
• Upalokayukta Deputy in some states

Exam Corner

Mains Angle

Questions on this topic usually ask about the effectiveness of the Lokpal. Use these points to add depth.

• Wider coverage Includes PM and Group D
• Timelines Fixed periods for enquiry and trial
• Gaps No suo motu power
• State variation Different structures