The document summarizes key differences between the Jan Lokpal draft bill and the government's draft Lokpal bill. Some of the major issues highlighted include:
1) The government's bill excludes the Prime Minister, judiciary, and MPs from Lokpal's purview, while the Jan Lokpal draft includes investigating allegations against all public servants.
2) The government's bill provides less independence and accountability of Lokpal, with selection and removal under government control.
3) The investigation process in the government's bill is seen as overly favorable to the accused and could compromise investigations.
4) The Jan Lokpal draft provides stronger powers and duties for Lokpal to prevent ongoing corruption cases and punish corrupt officials
The document discusses the Jan Lokpal Bill, a draft anti-corruption bill in India seeking an independent body called Lokpal to investigate corruption cases. It would complete investigations within a year and trials within the next year. Key features include establishing a central anti-corruption institution supervised by independent authorities. Anna Hazare initiated a movement in 2011 to pass a stronger Lokpal bill as conceived in the Jan Lokpal Bill.
Why we need Jan Lokpal? What is the difference between Govt's draft and Civil Society draft? How can Jan Lokpal help in curbing corruption? All these questions answered!!!
Lokpal and Lokayukta would be independent anti-corruption ombudsmen established at the central and state levels in India to investigate and prosecute corruption cases involving public officials more effectively. In contrast to existing systems, they would have fixed timelines for investigating complaints, powers to dismiss or suspend accused officials, and ensure swifter trials within one year. Ordinary citizens would have trust that their complaints would be heard without fear of retaliation.
Critical Analysis of Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013Peter Lal
This document provides an introduction and analysis of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act of 2013 in India. It begins with definitions of Lokpal, Ombudsman, and their roles in investigating corruption complaints against public officials. It then summarizes key aspects of the 2013 Act, including the establishment of Lokpal as an independent body at the central level and Lokayuktas at the state level. The summary outlines Lokpal's jurisdiction, complaint and investigation procedures, powers, and provisions regarding complaints against Lokpal members. In conclusion, it identifies issues of debate regarding the inclusion of the Prime Minister and other public figures fully within Lokpal's purview.
The document compares and contrasts the key differences between the government's draft Lokpal bill and the civil society draft bill. Some of the major differences highlighted include: selection and composition of the Lokpal members and search committee; accountability and independence of the Lokpal; jurisdiction and scope of corruption covered; powers to investigate complaints and tap phones; whistleblower protection; and inclusion of the prime minister. The civil society draft provides for a more independent and effective anti-corruption body compared to the government's draft which is seen as keeping control over the Lokpal and potentially making it a "puppet in the government's hands."
We are all part of this historic movement to eradicate corruption. Together, under the leadership of Anna Hazare ji, we are demanding the “Jan Lokpal Bill” – a strong law to ensure swift and certain punishment to the corrupt. Jan Lokpal Bill is a Law being made by the people and for the people.
The document summarizes the key aspects of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill in India, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central government level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas in each state. The Jan Lokpal and Lokayuktas would have powers to investigate and prosecute cases of corruption in a time-bound manner, recover stolen public funds, and dismiss corrupt public servants from their jobs. Selection processes for members and oversight measures are also outlined to ensure the independence and accountability of these new agencies.
The document summarizes key differences between the Jan Lokpal draft bill and the government's draft Lokpal bill. Some of the major issues highlighted include:
1) The government's bill excludes the Prime Minister, judiciary, and MPs from Lokpal's purview, while the Jan Lokpal draft includes investigating allegations against all public servants.
2) The government's bill provides less independence and accountability of Lokpal, with selection and removal under government control.
3) The investigation process in the government's bill is seen as overly favorable to the accused and could compromise investigations.
4) The Jan Lokpal draft provides stronger powers and duties for Lokpal to prevent ongoing corruption cases and punish corrupt officials
The document discusses the Jan Lokpal Bill, a draft anti-corruption bill in India seeking an independent body called Lokpal to investigate corruption cases. It would complete investigations within a year and trials within the next year. Key features include establishing a central anti-corruption institution supervised by independent authorities. Anna Hazare initiated a movement in 2011 to pass a stronger Lokpal bill as conceived in the Jan Lokpal Bill.
Why we need Jan Lokpal? What is the difference between Govt's draft and Civil Society draft? How can Jan Lokpal help in curbing corruption? All these questions answered!!!
Lokpal and Lokayukta would be independent anti-corruption ombudsmen established at the central and state levels in India to investigate and prosecute corruption cases involving public officials more effectively. In contrast to existing systems, they would have fixed timelines for investigating complaints, powers to dismiss or suspend accused officials, and ensure swifter trials within one year. Ordinary citizens would have trust that their complaints would be heard without fear of retaliation.
Critical Analysis of Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013Peter Lal
This document provides an introduction and analysis of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act of 2013 in India. It begins with definitions of Lokpal, Ombudsman, and their roles in investigating corruption complaints against public officials. It then summarizes key aspects of the 2013 Act, including the establishment of Lokpal as an independent body at the central level and Lokayuktas at the state level. The summary outlines Lokpal's jurisdiction, complaint and investigation procedures, powers, and provisions regarding complaints against Lokpal members. In conclusion, it identifies issues of debate regarding the inclusion of the Prime Minister and other public figures fully within Lokpal's purview.
The document compares and contrasts the key differences between the government's draft Lokpal bill and the civil society draft bill. Some of the major differences highlighted include: selection and composition of the Lokpal members and search committee; accountability and independence of the Lokpal; jurisdiction and scope of corruption covered; powers to investigate complaints and tap phones; whistleblower protection; and inclusion of the prime minister. The civil society draft provides for a more independent and effective anti-corruption body compared to the government's draft which is seen as keeping control over the Lokpal and potentially making it a "puppet in the government's hands."
We are all part of this historic movement to eradicate corruption. Together, under the leadership of Anna Hazare ji, we are demanding the “Jan Lokpal Bill” – a strong law to ensure swift and certain punishment to the corrupt. Jan Lokpal Bill is a Law being made by the people and for the people.
The document summarizes the key aspects of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill in India, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central government level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas in each state. The Jan Lokpal and Lokayuktas would have powers to investigate and prosecute cases of corruption in a time-bound manner, recover stolen public funds, and dismiss corrupt public servants from their jobs. Selection processes for members and oversight measures are also outlined to ensure the independence and accountability of these new agencies.
The document provides details about the composition and structure of Lokpal as established under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013. It states that Lokpal is a multi-member statutory body headed by a chairperson who is a former Chief Justice of India or Supreme Court judge. It can have a maximum of 8 members including at least 4 judicial members. The selection committee for appointing the chairperson and members includes the Prime Minister, Lok Sabha Speaker, and Leader of Opposition. Lokpal has inquiry and prosecution wings headed by Directors to investigate and prosecute corruption cases against public servants under its jurisdiction.
The document discusses the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 in India. It provides background on the historical development of ombudsman institutions and anti-corruption efforts in India. Key points include: the Act established the Lokpal as an independent body to investigate corruption cases against public officials; there were differences between the government's version of the Lokpal bill and the Jan Lokpal bill promoted by civil society; and while the Act was passed, critics argue it is not working effectively as the Lokpal has not been fully established and people are still waiting to see results in the fight against corruption.
Jan lokpal bill vs politics mani mishraMani Mishra
The document discusses corruption in Indian politics and efforts to establish an anti-corruption organization. It provides details on current anti-corruption laws and agencies, the history of the Jan Lokpal bill, comparisons between the current system and the proposed Jan Lokpal-Jan Lokayukta system, and shortcomings in the government-passed version of the Lokpal bill. The document concludes that while the Jan Lokpal bill drafted by civil society was intended to eradicate corruption, the version passed by the government was amended and less effective due to political influences.
The document discusses the key provisions of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The bill proposes that the Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and politicians in a time-bound manner, have powers to impose penalties and recover ill-gotten assets. It also outlines provisions to ensure the independence and transparency of the selection process and functioning of the Jan Lokpal. Some criticisms of the bill are also mentioned.
AAP's Janlokpal is weaker than Central Govt's LokpalShivendra Chauhan
The document highlights key differences between the central Lokpal bill and the AAP's proposed Jan Lokpal bill for Delhi. Some key differences include:
1) The composition and experience requirements of the selection committees that appoint Lokpal members differ, with the AAP bill potentially favoring those with legal experience or ties to AAP.
2) The AAP bill excludes MLAs of Delhi and NGOs from the Lokpal's jurisdiction, while the central bill includes them.
3) Provisions around frivolous complaints, repeal of existing laws, reporting structures, and prosecution powers are less stringent or clear in the AAP bill compared to the central bill.
The document provides an overview of the activities and achievements of the Federal Ministry of Justice of Nigeria from 2011-2013. It discusses key areas such as implementation of justice reforms, anti-terrorism legislation and amendments, reduction of judgment debts, international cooperation, freedom of information act, and recovery of stolen assets. The ministry collaborated with domestic and international partners to strengthen legislation, prosecutions, and improve access to justice.
Dr. bhattachan's presentation federalism-right to self-determination-ethnic a...edmnepal
The document discusses problems faced by indigenous peoples in Nepal, including loss of identity, land, and culture due to the country's unitary system and policies favoring a single religion, culture, language and ethnicity. It recommends that Nepal fully implement international agreements on indigenous rights, recognize ethnic autonomy and self-determination, and reform policies to protect indigenous languages, lands and development approaches. General recommendations are made to the Nepali government, Constituent Assembly, and international organizations to strengthen protections for indigenous peoples' human rights.
ARTICLE 4 CITIZENSHIP AND ARTICLE 5 SUFFRAGEjundumaug1
This document discusses citizenship and suffrage. It defines citizenship as full membership in a political community with rights and responsibilities. There are two methods of acquiring citizenship - jus sanguinis, by bloodline, and jus soli, by being born in the territory. The document also outlines who are considered citizens of the Philippines. It states that suffrage is a privilege granted by law, not a natural right. It describes the scope of suffrage to include elections, plebiscites, referendums, initiatives, and recall.
Executive legislative relation in ghanaernestboadi
This chapter provides background information and introduces the key topics that will be discussed in the research. It outlines the problem statement which is that the legislature in Ghana has failed to overcome executive dominance and perform its oversight functions effectively as required by the constitution. The objective is to critically assess parliament under the Fourth Republic and identify the major factors that have hindered its ability to oversee the executive. Key concepts that will guide the analysis are separation of powers and checks and balances.
The cost of federal legislation in nigeriastatisense
How PRODUCTIVE is the National Assembly?
This presentation explores budgetary allocations to the National Assembly since 1999 till date, and compares it with States Budgets, Federal Ministries & Agencies Budgets, as well as determine its ranking on a national budget scale
The document outlines a roadmap for the People's Assembly in Kenya, which aims to defend democracy and constitutionalism in the country. It establishes county and national levels of the Assembly [1] and lists objectives like defending devolution, pursuing electoral justice and economic liberation [2]. The structure section details representation at both levels, including governors, MPs, civil society and more [3]. Key milestones are outlined, like consultations, motions in county assemblies, and national conventions, with the goal of elections in 2018 or pursuing self-determination [6].
Raymond Atuguba on why we must eat the Ghana ConstitutionAmos Anyimadu
This document provides an introduction and overview for an upcoming lecture by Raymond Atuguba titled "Ebi Constitution we go Chop: An Examination of Article 1(1) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana". The introduction discusses the speaker's past experiences receiving both praise and criticism for previous public comments and lectures. It then outlines the goals and scope of a long-term project to thoroughly analyze each provision of Ghana's 1992 constitution through various lenses. The upcoming lecture will focus on analyzing Article 1(1) as part of this larger constitutional analysis project.
The document summarizes the Jan Lokpal Bill, an anti-corruption bill drafted by civil society activists in India. It discusses key features of the bill such as establishing a central anti-corruption body called Lokpal to investigate corruption cases independently. It also covers differences between the government's draft Lokpal bill and the Jan Lokpal bill, as well as advantages and disadvantages of the proposed bill. Overall, the Jan Lokpal bill aims to create a stronger anti-corruption framework in India by granting more independence and powers to the Lokpal agency.
The Jan Lokpal Bill aims to establish independent anti-corruption bodies called Jan Lokpal at the central level and Jan Lokayukta at the state level. The bill seeks to give these bodies powers to investigate and prosecute cases of corruption against public servants, politicians, and bureaucrats. It also outlines an independent and transparent selection process for the members and leadership of Jan Lokpal. However, the government's version of the bill excludes powers over judiciary, does not cover the Prime Minister, and retains more control over the anti-corruption bodies. Overall, the Jan Lokpal Bill envisions stronger anti-corruption mechanisms than the government's bill, but its actual impact will depend on proper implementation.
The document summarizes the key aspects of the Jan Lokpal Bill, an anti-corruption law proposed in India. It establishes independent anti-corruption ombudsmen organizations called Jan Lokpal at the central level and Jan Lokayukta at the state level to investigate corruption complaints against public servants. The bill aims to ensure swift investigation and prosecution of corruption cases, protect whistleblowers, recover stolen public funds, and introduce transparency in assets and finances of politicians and bureaucrats. It also establishes grievance redressal mechanisms for citizens to curb petty corruption. Selection processes for members and oversight measures are proposed to ensure the independence and integrity of these anti-graft watchdogs.
The document compares key differences between the Jan Lokpal bill proposed by anti-corruption activists and the government's version of the Lokpal bill. The Jan Lokpal bill provides more oversight powers to the Lokpal institution, such as the ability to investigate the prime minister and judiciary for corruption. However, it also makes the Lokpal more accountable, such as allowing citizens to petition for a Lokpal's removal. In contrast, the government's version limits the Lokpal's powers but provides more immunity from oversight of its own actions. In conclusion, the document argues the government's bill is insufficient and aims to create an illusion of an anti-corruption law rather than providing true oversight.
The document provides a comparative chart contrasting the key aspects of the Government's proposed Lokpal Bill versus the Jan Lokpal Bill. Some of the major differences highlighted include:
- The Government's bill would leave the Prime Minister, judiciary, and MPs outside the Lokpal's jurisdiction, while the Jan Lokpal Bill wants them to be investigated.
- The Government's bill would only cover 65,000 Group A officers, while the Jan Lokpal Bill wants all public servants to be under the Lokpal.
- The Government's bill would give the Lokpal authority over all NGOs but less than 0.5% of government employees. The Jan Lokpal Bill argues this imbalance favors protecting corrupt officials
The document discusses the key provisions of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The bill proposes that the Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and politicians in a time-bound manner, have powers to impose penalties and recover ill-gotten assets. It also outlines provisions to ensure the independence and transparency of the selection process and functioning of the Jan Lokpal. Some criticisms of the bill are also mentioned.
The document discusses the key provisions of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The bill proposes that the Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants in a time-bound manner, have powers to dismiss corrupt officials and order asset confiscation. It would also provide grievance redressal for citizens and impose penalties on officers causing delays in public services. Selection processes have been outlined to ensure the independence and integrity of the Jan Lokpal body. Some criticisms of the bill are also mentioned.
The document provides details about the composition and structure of Lokpal as established under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013. It states that Lokpal is a multi-member statutory body headed by a chairperson who is a former Chief Justice of India or Supreme Court judge. It can have a maximum of 8 members including at least 4 judicial members. The selection committee for appointing the chairperson and members includes the Prime Minister, Lok Sabha Speaker, and Leader of Opposition. Lokpal has inquiry and prosecution wings headed by Directors to investigate and prosecute corruption cases against public servants under its jurisdiction.
The document discusses the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 in India. It provides background on the historical development of ombudsman institutions and anti-corruption efforts in India. Key points include: the Act established the Lokpal as an independent body to investigate corruption cases against public officials; there were differences between the government's version of the Lokpal bill and the Jan Lokpal bill promoted by civil society; and while the Act was passed, critics argue it is not working effectively as the Lokpal has not been fully established and people are still waiting to see results in the fight against corruption.
Jan lokpal bill vs politics mani mishraMani Mishra
The document discusses corruption in Indian politics and efforts to establish an anti-corruption organization. It provides details on current anti-corruption laws and agencies, the history of the Jan Lokpal bill, comparisons between the current system and the proposed Jan Lokpal-Jan Lokayukta system, and shortcomings in the government-passed version of the Lokpal bill. The document concludes that while the Jan Lokpal bill drafted by civil society was intended to eradicate corruption, the version passed by the government was amended and less effective due to political influences.
The document discusses the key provisions of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The bill proposes that the Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and politicians in a time-bound manner, have powers to impose penalties and recover ill-gotten assets. It also outlines provisions to ensure the independence and transparency of the selection process and functioning of the Jan Lokpal. Some criticisms of the bill are also mentioned.
AAP's Janlokpal is weaker than Central Govt's LokpalShivendra Chauhan
The document highlights key differences between the central Lokpal bill and the AAP's proposed Jan Lokpal bill for Delhi. Some key differences include:
1) The composition and experience requirements of the selection committees that appoint Lokpal members differ, with the AAP bill potentially favoring those with legal experience or ties to AAP.
2) The AAP bill excludes MLAs of Delhi and NGOs from the Lokpal's jurisdiction, while the central bill includes them.
3) Provisions around frivolous complaints, repeal of existing laws, reporting structures, and prosecution powers are less stringent or clear in the AAP bill compared to the central bill.
The document provides an overview of the activities and achievements of the Federal Ministry of Justice of Nigeria from 2011-2013. It discusses key areas such as implementation of justice reforms, anti-terrorism legislation and amendments, reduction of judgment debts, international cooperation, freedom of information act, and recovery of stolen assets. The ministry collaborated with domestic and international partners to strengthen legislation, prosecutions, and improve access to justice.
Dr. bhattachan's presentation federalism-right to self-determination-ethnic a...edmnepal
The document discusses problems faced by indigenous peoples in Nepal, including loss of identity, land, and culture due to the country's unitary system and policies favoring a single religion, culture, language and ethnicity. It recommends that Nepal fully implement international agreements on indigenous rights, recognize ethnic autonomy and self-determination, and reform policies to protect indigenous languages, lands and development approaches. General recommendations are made to the Nepali government, Constituent Assembly, and international organizations to strengthen protections for indigenous peoples' human rights.
ARTICLE 4 CITIZENSHIP AND ARTICLE 5 SUFFRAGEjundumaug1
This document discusses citizenship and suffrage. It defines citizenship as full membership in a political community with rights and responsibilities. There are two methods of acquiring citizenship - jus sanguinis, by bloodline, and jus soli, by being born in the territory. The document also outlines who are considered citizens of the Philippines. It states that suffrage is a privilege granted by law, not a natural right. It describes the scope of suffrage to include elections, plebiscites, referendums, initiatives, and recall.
Executive legislative relation in ghanaernestboadi
This chapter provides background information and introduces the key topics that will be discussed in the research. It outlines the problem statement which is that the legislature in Ghana has failed to overcome executive dominance and perform its oversight functions effectively as required by the constitution. The objective is to critically assess parliament under the Fourth Republic and identify the major factors that have hindered its ability to oversee the executive. Key concepts that will guide the analysis are separation of powers and checks and balances.
The cost of federal legislation in nigeriastatisense
How PRODUCTIVE is the National Assembly?
This presentation explores budgetary allocations to the National Assembly since 1999 till date, and compares it with States Budgets, Federal Ministries & Agencies Budgets, as well as determine its ranking on a national budget scale
The document outlines a roadmap for the People's Assembly in Kenya, which aims to defend democracy and constitutionalism in the country. It establishes county and national levels of the Assembly [1] and lists objectives like defending devolution, pursuing electoral justice and economic liberation [2]. The structure section details representation at both levels, including governors, MPs, civil society and more [3]. Key milestones are outlined, like consultations, motions in county assemblies, and national conventions, with the goal of elections in 2018 or pursuing self-determination [6].
Raymond Atuguba on why we must eat the Ghana ConstitutionAmos Anyimadu
This document provides an introduction and overview for an upcoming lecture by Raymond Atuguba titled "Ebi Constitution we go Chop: An Examination of Article 1(1) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana". The introduction discusses the speaker's past experiences receiving both praise and criticism for previous public comments and lectures. It then outlines the goals and scope of a long-term project to thoroughly analyze each provision of Ghana's 1992 constitution through various lenses. The upcoming lecture will focus on analyzing Article 1(1) as part of this larger constitutional analysis project.
The document summarizes the Jan Lokpal Bill, an anti-corruption bill drafted by civil society activists in India. It discusses key features of the bill such as establishing a central anti-corruption body called Lokpal to investigate corruption cases independently. It also covers differences between the government's draft Lokpal bill and the Jan Lokpal bill, as well as advantages and disadvantages of the proposed bill. Overall, the Jan Lokpal bill aims to create a stronger anti-corruption framework in India by granting more independence and powers to the Lokpal agency.
The Jan Lokpal Bill aims to establish independent anti-corruption bodies called Jan Lokpal at the central level and Jan Lokayukta at the state level. The bill seeks to give these bodies powers to investigate and prosecute cases of corruption against public servants, politicians, and bureaucrats. It also outlines an independent and transparent selection process for the members and leadership of Jan Lokpal. However, the government's version of the bill excludes powers over judiciary, does not cover the Prime Minister, and retains more control over the anti-corruption bodies. Overall, the Jan Lokpal Bill envisions stronger anti-corruption mechanisms than the government's bill, but its actual impact will depend on proper implementation.
The document summarizes the key aspects of the Jan Lokpal Bill, an anti-corruption law proposed in India. It establishes independent anti-corruption ombudsmen organizations called Jan Lokpal at the central level and Jan Lokayukta at the state level to investigate corruption complaints against public servants. The bill aims to ensure swift investigation and prosecution of corruption cases, protect whistleblowers, recover stolen public funds, and introduce transparency in assets and finances of politicians and bureaucrats. It also establishes grievance redressal mechanisms for citizens to curb petty corruption. Selection processes for members and oversight measures are proposed to ensure the independence and integrity of these anti-graft watchdogs.
The document compares key differences between the Jan Lokpal bill proposed by anti-corruption activists and the government's version of the Lokpal bill. The Jan Lokpal bill provides more oversight powers to the Lokpal institution, such as the ability to investigate the prime minister and judiciary for corruption. However, it also makes the Lokpal more accountable, such as allowing citizens to petition for a Lokpal's removal. In contrast, the government's version limits the Lokpal's powers but provides more immunity from oversight of its own actions. In conclusion, the document argues the government's bill is insufficient and aims to create an illusion of an anti-corruption law rather than providing true oversight.
The document provides a comparative chart contrasting the key aspects of the Government's proposed Lokpal Bill versus the Jan Lokpal Bill. Some of the major differences highlighted include:
- The Government's bill would leave the Prime Minister, judiciary, and MPs outside the Lokpal's jurisdiction, while the Jan Lokpal Bill wants them to be investigated.
- The Government's bill would only cover 65,000 Group A officers, while the Jan Lokpal Bill wants all public servants to be under the Lokpal.
- The Government's bill would give the Lokpal authority over all NGOs but less than 0.5% of government employees. The Jan Lokpal Bill argues this imbalance favors protecting corrupt officials
The document discusses the key provisions of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The bill proposes that the Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and politicians in a time-bound manner, have powers to impose penalties and recover ill-gotten assets. It also outlines provisions to ensure the independence and transparency of the selection process and functioning of the Jan Lokpal. Some criticisms of the bill are also mentioned.
The document discusses the key provisions of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The bill proposes that the Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants in a time-bound manner, have powers to dismiss corrupt officials and order asset confiscation. It would also provide grievance redressal for citizens and impose penalties on officers causing delays in public services. Selection processes have been outlined to ensure the independence and integrity of the Jan Lokpal body. Some criticisms of the bill are also mentioned.
The document discusses the key provisions of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The bill proposes that the Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and politicians in a time-bound manner, have powers to impose penalties and recover ill-gotten assets. It also outlines provisions to ensure the independence and transparency of the selection process and functioning of the Jan Lokpal. Some criticisms of the bill are also mentioned.
The document discusses the key provisions of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and provide protection to whistleblowers. It would have powers to prosecute cases, recover losses to the government, and dismiss or impose penalties on guilty officers. The selection process for members of the Jan Lokpal is designed to ensure independence and transparency.
The document discusses the key features of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and provide protection to whistleblowers. It would have powers to prosecute cases, recover losses to the government, and dismiss or impose penalties on guilty officers. The selection process for members of the Jan Lokpal is designed to ensure independence and transparency.
The document discusses the key features of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and provide protection to whistleblowers. It would have powers to prosecute cases, recover losses to the government, and dismiss or impose penalties on guilty officers. The selection process for members of the Jan Lokpal is designed to ensure independence and transparency.
The document discusses the key provisions of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The bill proposes that the Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and politicians in a time-bound manner, have powers to impose penalties and recover ill-gotten assets. It also outlines provisions to ensure the independence and transparency of the selection process and functioning of the Jan Lokpal. Some criticisms of the bill are also mentioned.
The document discusses the key provisions of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The bill proposes that the Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and politicians in a time-bound manner, have powers to impose penalties and recover ill-gotten assets. It also outlines provisions to ensure the independence and transparency of the selection process and functioning of the Jan Lokpal. Some criticisms of the bill are also mentioned.
Whole country supports anna Hazare movement India against corruption.. but few people only know what is jan lokpal bill... this presentation will help everyone to know what is jan lokpal bill in detail... thank you .. support anna and make this movement Grand success...
The document discusses the key provisions of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The bill proposes that the Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and politicians in a time-bound manner, have powers to impose penalties and recover ill-gotten assets. It also outlines provisions to ensure the independence and transparency of the selection process and functioning of the Jan Lokpal. Some criticisms of the bill are also mentioned.
The document discusses the key provisions of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The bill proposes that the Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and politicians in a time-bound manner, have powers to impose penalties and recover ill-gotten assets. It also outlines provisions to ensure the independence and transparency of the selection process and functioning of the Jan Lokpal. Some criticisms of the bill are also mentioned.
The document discusses the key features of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, which aims to establish an independent anti-corruption ombudsman agency called the Jan Lokpal at the central level and corresponding Jan Lokayuktas at the state level. The Jan Lokpal would investigate corruption complaints against public servants and provide protection to whistleblowers. It would have powers to prosecute cases, recover losses to the government, and dismiss or impose penalties on guilty officers. The selection process for members of the Jan Lokpal is designed to ensure independence and transparency.
Leveraging Generative AI to Drive Nonprofit InnovationTechSoup
In this webinar, participants learned how to utilize Generative AI to streamline operations and elevate member engagement. Amazon Web Service experts provided a customer specific use cases and dived into low/no-code tools that are quick and easy to deploy through Amazon Web Service (AWS.)
THE SACRIFICE HOW PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTS STUDENTS ARE SACRIFICING TO CHANGE T...indexPub
The recent surge in pro-Palestine student activism has prompted significant responses from universities, ranging from negotiations and divestment commitments to increased transparency about investments in companies supporting the war on Gaza. This activism has led to the cessation of student encampments but also highlighted the substantial sacrifices made by students, including academic disruptions and personal risks. The primary drivers of these protests are poor university administration, lack of transparency, and inadequate communication between officials and students. This study examines the profound emotional, psychological, and professional impacts on students engaged in pro-Palestine protests, focusing on Generation Z's (Gen-Z) activism dynamics. This paper explores the significant sacrifices made by these students and even the professors supporting the pro-Palestine movement, with a focus on recent global movements. Through an in-depth analysis of printed and electronic media, the study examines the impacts of these sacrifices on the academic and personal lives of those involved. The paper highlights examples from various universities, demonstrating student activism's long-term and short-term effects, including disciplinary actions, social backlash, and career implications. The researchers also explore the broader implications of student sacrifices. The findings reveal that these sacrifices are driven by a profound commitment to justice and human rights, and are influenced by the increasing availability of information, peer interactions, and personal convictions. The study also discusses the broader implications of this activism, comparing it to historical precedents and assessing its potential to influence policy and public opinion. The emotional and psychological toll on student activists is significant, but their sense of purpose and community support mitigates some of these challenges. However, the researchers call for acknowledging the broader Impact of these sacrifices on the future global movement of FreePalestine.
This presentation was provided by Racquel Jemison, Ph.D., Christina MacLaughlin, Ph.D., and Paulomi Majumder. Ph.D., all of the American Chemical Society, for the second session of NISO's 2024 Training Series "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape." Session Two: 'Expanding Pathways to Publishing Careers,' was held June 13, 2024.
Philippine Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan (EPP) CurriculumMJDuyan
(𝐓𝐋𝐄 𝟏𝟎𝟎) (𝐋𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝟏)-𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐬
𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐏𝐏 𝐂𝐮𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐮𝐦 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐩𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬:
- Understand the goals and objectives of the Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan (EPP) curriculum, recognizing its importance in fostering practical life skills and values among students. Students will also be able to identify the key components and subjects covered, such as agriculture, home economics, industrial arts, and information and communication technology.
𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐜𝐨𝐩𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐚𝐧 𝐄𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐮𝐫:
-Define entrepreneurship, distinguishing it from general business activities by emphasizing its focus on innovation, risk-taking, and value creation. Students will describe the characteristics and traits of successful entrepreneurs, including their roles and responsibilities, and discuss the broader economic and social impacts of entrepreneurial activities on both local and global scales.
A Visual Guide to 1 Samuel | A Tale of Two HeartsSteve Thomason
These slides walk through the story of 1 Samuel. Samuel is the last judge of Israel. The people reject God and want a king. Saul is anointed as the first king, but he is not a good king. David, the shepherd boy is anointed and Saul is envious of him. David shows honor while Saul continues to self destruct.
Gender and Mental Health - Counselling and Family Therapy Applications and In...PsychoTech Services
A proprietary approach developed by bringing together the best of learning theories from Psychology, design principles from the world of visualization, and pedagogical methods from over a decade of training experience, that enables you to: Learn better, faster!
2. Government’s Lokpal
Directed against those who raise their voice
against corruption?
0.5 % 100%
Jurisdiction
Only 65,000 people out of 1.2 crore All NGOs, Societies, Trusts ,
Only Group A Central Govt employees even unregistered
Instead of ALL Govt employees
[Section 17 (1) (e) of Govt Bill]
3. Government’s Lokpal
Provides illegitimate protection to the corrupt officials?
If a citizen complains against a govt officer’s corruption to Lokpal…
•Govt officer can file a Cross Complaint directly to the Special Court
without Preliminary Enquiry that whether complain was frivolous
•Govt officer given free advocate while the Citizen has to defend himself
•If complain proved frivolous citizen gets minimum 2 years jail
•If corruption of Govt officer proved – gets minimum 6 months jail
[Section 50,51 of Govt Bill]
4. Government’s Lokpal
Pro-accused investigation process?
After preliminary enquiry, accused given a hearing before filing an FIR
to explain why an FIR should not be registered against him.
After completion of investigations, presented evidence & again given a hearing
to explain why a case should not be filed in the court
During investigations, if investigations are to be started against any new persons,
they too would be presented with evidence against them & given hearing
Increased risk to whistleblowers
Nowhere else in the world is Criminal Jurisprudence like this!
[Section 23, 24 of Govt Bill]
5. Critical Issues – Prime Minister
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
• Lokpal should have power to investigate
allegations of corruption against PM. PM kept out of Lokpal’s purview.
• Special safeguards provided against
frivolous & mischievous complaints
CORRUPTION by PM can be investigated, under Prevention of Corruption Act
Govt wants investigations to be done by CBI…
….which comes directly under him, rather than independent Lokpal
6. Critical Issues – Judiciary
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
• Lokpal should have power to investigate
Judiciary kept out of Lokpal’s purview.
allegations of corruption against Judiciary.
• Special safeguards provided against
frivolous & mischievous complaints
Government wants it to be included in Judicial Accountability Bill (JAB)
In JAB permission to enquire against a judge will be given by a Three member
committee, Two judges & a retd Chief justice of the SAM
E court)
... If only a strong and effective JAB were considered & enacted simultaneously
7. Critical Issues – Judiciary
• Judicial Accountability Bill (JAB), drafted by the government, does not
talk of bribery by the judges. It only talks of “misbehavior”.
• National Oversight Committee sought to be created through JAB will not
have the police and investigative powers and machinery to deal with
criminal complaints of bribery, which Lokpal would have. Therefore, the
two bills actually complement each other.
• Even if judicial corruption were included in JAB, it is not clear when
would an effective JAB become a reality? Should we wait endlessly till
JAB became a reality?
8. Critical Issues – MPs
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
Lokpal should be able to investigate Government has excluded this
allegations that any MP had taken bribe to from Lokpal’s purview.
vote or speak in Parliament
Article 105(2) gives them Freedom to Vote or Speak in Parliament,
not Freedom for taking Bribe for it!!!
Govt virtually giving a license to MPs to take bribes with impunity
Strikes at the foundations of our democracy
9. Critical Issues – Grievance Redressal
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
Violation of CITIZEN’S CHARTER (if an officer
does not do a COMMON MAN’s work in No penalties proposed. So, this
prescribed time) by an officer should be will remain only on paper
penalized and should be deemed to be
corruption.
Government had earlier agreed to it –
(Joint committee meeting, 23rd May)
Unfortunately have gone back on this decision.
10. Critical Issues – CBI
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
• Anti-corruption branch of Government wants to retain its
hold over CBI.
CBI should be merged into
Lokpal.
CBI misused by government.
Recently, govt exempted CBI from RTI,
11. Critical Issues – CBI
Jan Lokpal Draft Government Draft
• Broad based selection committee with 2 politicians, 4 • With 5 out of 10 members from ruling establishment, 6
judges and 2 independent constitutional authorities. politicians in selection committee, ensured that only
• An independent search committee consisting of pliable & weak people be selected
retired constitutional authorities to prepare first list. • Search committee to be selected by selection committee
• A detailed transparent selection process with PUBLIC • No selection process provided.
PARTICIPATION
Government’s will be able to appoint its own Lokpal members & Chairperson.
Earlier consensus on Selection committee, Selection process,
Disagreement only on composition of search committee –
(Joint Committee meeting, 7th May)
12. Critical Issues – Accountability (Lokpal Members)
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
• Accountable to the PEOPLE
• Any Citizen can make a complaint to Accountable to the
Supreme Court and seek removal. Government.
•Judicial review over the actions of the Lokpal
Only government can seek
by the High Courts under Article 226 and the
Supreme Court under Article 32 and 136 removal of Lokpal
Both Selection and Removal of Lokpal in
Government’s CONTROL
Puppet in government’s hands
13. Critical Issues – Accountability (Lokpal Staff)
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
Lokpal itself will investigate
Complaint against Lokpal staff will be
complaints against its own staff,
heard by an independent authority thus creating serious conflicts of
interest
Government’s Lokpal is accountable either to itself or the
government.
We suggested accountability of Lokpal directly to PUBLIC
14. Critical Issues – Method of Enquiry
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
•Method would be the same as provided CrPC being amended
in CrPC like in any other criminal case. Special protection to the accused
• After preliminary enquiry, all evidence provided to
•After preliminary enquiry, an FIR will be the accused & hearing for why an FIR should not be
registered. regd. against him.
• After completion of investigations, again all evidence
•After investigations, case will be
provided & hearing for why a case should not be filed
presented before a court, where the trial against him in the court.
will take place
• During investigations, if investigations are to be
started against any new persons, they would also be
presented with all evidence against them and heard.
15. Investigation process provided by the government
would severely
COMPROMISE ALL INVESTIGATIONS
If evidence were made available to the accused at various
stages of investigations,it would also
REVEAL IDENTITY OF WHISTLEBLOWERS
compromising their security
Such a pro-accused process of Criminal
Jurisprudence NOWHERE IN THE WORLD
Such process would
KILL ALMOST EVERY CASE !!!!
16. Critical Issues – Lokayukta
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
• The same bill should provide for
Only Lokpal at the centre would
Lokpal at centre and Lokayuktas in be created through this Bill.
states
According to Mr Pranab Mukherjee, some of the CMs have objected
State Information Commissions were also set up under RTI Act through
single Act only.
17. Critical Issues – Whistleblower Protection
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
• Lokpal will be required to provide
protection to whistleblowers, witnesses No mention in this law.
and victims of corruption
Protection for whistleblowers is being provided through a separate law.
That law so bad - Trashed by Standing Committee of Parliament - headed by
Ms Jayanthi Natrajan.
Earlier agreed that Lokpal would be given the duty of providing protection to
whistleblowers under the other law, & that law would also be discussed & improved in
Joint Committee only ( Joint Committee meeting, 23rd May)
18. Critical Issues – Special Benches in HC
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
High Courts will set up special
benches to hear appeals in No such provision
corruption cases to fast track
them
One study shows that it takes 25 years at
appellate stage in corruption cases.
19. Critical Issues – CrPC
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
• On the basis of past experience on
why anti-corruption cases take a long Not included
time in courts and why do our agencies
lose them, some amendments to CrPC
have been suggested to prevent
frequent stay orders.
20. Critical Issues – Dismissal of Corrupt
Government Servant)
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
• After completion of investigations, in
addition to filing a case in a court for
prosecution, bench of Lokpal will hold The minister will decide
open hearings and decide whether to whether to remove a corrupt
remove the government servant from officer or not.
job.
Often, Ministers are beneficiaries of corruption of senior officers
Power of removing corrupt people from jobs should be given to
independent Lokpal rather than this being decided by the minister in the
same department.
21. Critical Issues – Punishment
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
• Maximum punishment is ten years
• Higher punishment if rank of accused None of these accepted. Only
is higher maximum punishment raised to
• Higher fines if accused are business
10 years.
entities
• If successfully convicted, a business
entity should be blacklisted from future
contracts.
22. Critical Issues – Financial Independence
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
Lokpal 11 members collectively will
Finance ministry will decide
decide how much budget do they
need
the quantum of budget
This seriously compromises with the financial
independence of Lokpal
23. Critical Issues – Prevent ongoing Corruption
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
• Lokpal will have a duty to take steps
to prevent corruption in any ongoing No such duties and powers of
activity, if brought to his notice. If need Lokpal
be, Lokpal will obtain orders from High
Court.
2G is believed to have been known while the process was going on.
Shouldn’t some agency have a duty to take steps to stop
further corruption rather than just punish people later?
24. Critical Issues – Tap Phones
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
Lokpal bench will grant Home Secretary would
permission to do so grant permission
The right to tap phones is a basic right provided to
all Investigation Agencies in the country even now
Permission from Home Secretary will compromise investigations.
25. Critical Issues – Delegation of Powers
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
•Lokpal members will only hear cases
against senior officers and politicians or All work will be done by 11
cases involving huge amounts. members of Lokpal. Practically
• Rest of the work will be done by
no delegation.
officers working under Lokpal
This is a sure way to kill Lokpal.
Within no time, the members would be overburdened.
26. Critical Issues – NGOs
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
Only government funded
All NGOs, big or small, even
NGOs covered unregistered, are covered.
A method to arm twist NGOs
About 5 lakh registered NGOs and millions unregistered
Contradicts own logic of not including lower bureacracy because of
large numbers overburdening Lokpal
27. Critical Issues – False, Frivolous & Vexatious Complaints
Jan Lokpal Draft Government’s Draft
• No imprisonment, only fines on
• 2-5 years of imprisonment
complainants. & fine
• Lokpal will decide whether a • The accused can file complaint
against complainant in a court
complaint is frivolous or • Prosecutor and all expenses of
vexatious or false. this case will be provided by the
government to the accused
• The complainant will also have
to pay a compensation to the
accused
28. Every accused will harass complainants.
Corrupt people will file cases against
complainants and no one will dare file any
complaint.
Interestingly,
Minimum punishment for
corruption is 6 months but for
filing false complaint is 2
years.