Critical Analysis of Ombudsman in India

Ombudsman: Understanding the concept

The concept of Ombudsman first evolved in Sweden and could not see any development beyond that over a hundred years. It was in the 20th century when the concept spread out in other countries like Finland and Denmark. But in India, it has not been so. The country does believe in the concept of Ombudsman.

An Ombudsman is a person of public faith and an official who is cast with the responsibility of maintaining justice. It is a means which has emerged from public confidence. He is a public servant. He is believed to maintain the Rule of Law. The abuse of process and maladministration are the evils of the society that needs to be eradicated from its roots. The method to be adopted for that may be various Ombudsman is one of them. The concept evolved in the light of protection of the democratic aspect and the protection of the individual rights of the citizens. It was seen as a means of raising their voice against the growing complexities of various branches of the Government and other institutions. Arbitrariness is present at each level of the system. To fight these an office is needed to reach out. Other countries do appoint Ombudsman and accrue the benefits thereto. It is a very traditional concept and has grown since then. The office of an Ombudsman serves multiple purposes and we will discuss it in respect of India in detail further.

Evolution and aim of theconcept

Scandinavian countries were the first to acknowledge the concept of Ombudsman. It was referred to as a watchdog on the Government. It was supposed to be an intermediary who is impartial towards both the Government and the public. Ombudsman is public-oriented but it is not an administration. It is easy to access and visible as an institution that has a higher status and is resourceful to fulfill its missions. It is an autonomous institution that is neither dependent on the Executive nor the Legislature. It acts as a monitoring specialist and is an expert hired in the field.

The emergence of Ombudsman in India

Rising on the concept of Ombudsman, India adopted Lokpal, an institution that is very similar to that of Ombudsman just like many other nations. It has been seen as an advocate of the public which operates independently of three organs of the Government. It serves the functions of the Judiciary. Although it is accountable to the Legislature, itmay act at his motion (suo moto) or on the application moved by a citizen. Various states have adopted the concept in the form of the LokAyukta. Odisha is the first state to adopt it.

In India, no major development has been made concerning it. No method may be made applicable to all. It is not uniform. The states are trying but unless the Centre takes stringent steps for its adoption there is no goal which we are moving towards. The Centre’s implementation has not been so substantial with leaves a window for the process to be abused or misused. The concept if made applicable universally will lead to the end of corruption and maladministration. Rising nepotism is also a driver for the concept to evolve. We all know how lengthy is the process of getting a case or appeal to be heard today. Inordinate delays and procedural complexities have it made difficult for remedies to be availed. Justice delayed is justice denied is the phrase that we come across all most daily. This has led to the establishment of Lokpal to act as a mechanism for redressal. The existing legislation has proved not to be enough. Lokpal makes the provision for the citizens to complain to the public officials. It will enquire into the case curbing corruption and misuse by the public authority. A resolution was moved in 1964 for the same but withdrawn later on. The resolution talks about the establishment of an Administrative Reforms Commission which suggested a procedure to redress the grievance creation and a mechanism to take issue at hand. The Lokpal bill has been introduced many times but it was not until 2008 that it was passed. Several recommendations from time to time were made. It wasn’t until 2011 when Shri Pranab Mukherjee took the initiative and made suggestions for anti-corruption. A study of the bill was then made.

JanLokpal Bill made provision for the setup of an autonomous body that is supposed to complete the investigation process within one year. The bill was drafted by Justice Santosh Hedge,a Supreme Court judge and former Karnataka Lokayukta, Shri. Prashant Bhushan who is himself a lawyer at the Supreme Court and Shri Arvind Kejriwal. The bill aims at putting the wrongdoer behind the bars within 2 years after the complaint is lodged. It sought power for the public officials to be prosecuted without any permission from the Government. The infamous hunger strike by Anna Hazare for the passing of Jan Lokpal Bill is unforgettable. They were the constant believers that it will lead to an end of maladministration.

About Lokpal

The constitution of the Lokpal was as follows:-

  1. A chairperson
  2. Members belonging in the category of judicial members and SC-ST women or minorities being 50-50 in the ratio.
  3. Separate wing for preliminary inquiry and prosecution wing there has to be a director from the prosecution wing inquiry and other officers.

The bill envisaged for the office of the Prime Minister to come under its purview. It came as such but with certain limitations. The proceedings could be initiated against the Prime Minister by the full bench with a three-fourth majority. In-camera proceedings were provided for. The bill provides for setting up a Central Vigilance Commission which is supposed to send its report in certain aspects. Lokpal may confiscate the property if so required. If a case is referred to the CBI,Lokpal will have the directory power.

In 2006, India’s banking Ombudsman scheme was launched; the appointment of such Ombudsman was to be made by the RBI to act as a Quasi-judicial authority and redress the complaints relating to the banking services. Various grounds for complaint were also laid down. The provision lays down that the application for the grievance is to be made to the bank first and if not entertained, the aggrieved person may reach the Ombudsman. This was a strict rule. If the complaint seemed vexatious or in contravention to the provisions of the scheme, it was not considered. If the person is not remedied or satisfied, he could take the records of law and also reach the appellate authority.

Criticism of theOmbudsman

The Jan Lokpal bill has been criticized on many grounds. Some aspects appear to be quite vague. It is based on imaginative premises. It might lead to operation and mismanagement. The very aspect of democracy will be hindered. It is referred to as a naïve approach to deal with the issue of corruption.

Arvind Kejriwal also criticized the bill on the ground that it might result in encumbrance of the powersof other existing authorities of the law. The bill proposes to look at the case that corruption can’t be resolved by the existing mechanism of the law. The unchallengeable aspect of the decision made by the Lokpal is also not clearly defined.CBI also rejected the merger between the two institutions as a believed it would hamper the core functioning of the CBI.

Benefits

Despite all the criticism of the bill, in the year 2013, it finally was passed. In India, the concept of Ombudsman lacks independence. That is to say, it has no teeth. A vast percentage ofthe Indian population is below average literacy level so they might not be aware of it. The concept proposes a system of checks and balances. How much we want to implement is dependent upon the nature of the officers so appointed in this respect. The goal behind the concept of Ombudsman or in India Lokpal is to attain public confidence to protect their rights and interests in the atmosphere of social evils like corruption, maladministration, and arbitrariness.

The implementation, however, does not seem very fruitful. The mechanism is simple and cheap in redressing the grievances of the citizens of the country, to protect them and provide acorruption-free nation. The phrase that- more the corruption in a state more are the laws needed applies in the present situation. Central policies need to be more stringent to achieve the goal that is desired.Many activists have talked about effective mechanism implementation policy. Social media is one of the most important platforms today and has helped the anti-corruption movement spread. Presently, we have Pinaki Chandra Ghose as the Chairperson of Lokpal

Conclusion

Thus, it can be duly seen that if the measures are properly exacerbated, we can curb the malpractices prevailing in our society. The social evils can be eradicated from the roots. We need proper policies and provisions. Just like other countries, we can also achieve anti-corruption. Public functionaries can be made to function properly. The battle can be fought by the proper functioning of the Lokpal and the Lokayukta. The initiatives from the Centre in this respect are awaited.

 

By-

 

 

 

 Vanshika Garg

(Amity Law School, Noida)

 

Previous post: https://desikanoon.in/case-comment-selvi-j-jayalalithaa-ors-v-state-of-karnataka-ors/