Skip to main content

Lokpal and Ombudsman in India - By Isha

 Lokpal and Ombudsman in India – By Isha


Introduction

Gone are the days when law and legal news was involved only as a small section of our daily lives. With what’s happening in our country and world as a whole, it’s not an option to be unaware of laws.

More so, with Monumental judgements of the Supreme Court – Privacy Judgement, Adultery Judgements, Decriminalization of Homosexuality, etc, - Law and legal news are everyday making new headlines.

But like any other year, even this year there were some negative news that grabbed our attention- Various scams, Auditing and Accounting errors, etc.

 In 2018 Corruption Perception Index which is an international watchdog for corruption ranked India at 81st position also Transparency International ranked India at 1st position in case of bribery while studying 16 Asian Pacific countries. 

While studying about the level of corruption, international agencies stated that there are three main problems because of which the level of corruption is very high, these are as follows:

  • Poorly functioning public institutions

  • Ignorance/ Non implementation of Anti Graft laws ( opposed or designed to reduce corruption)

  • Level of bribery and extortion is very high

In lieu of this there are some Anti Graft laws in our country: 

  • Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2018 (FEBL) – This bill is mainly to punish those offenders who have absconded the country after various scams.

  •  National Financial Regulating Authority (NFRA) – This body was established due to accounting and auditing scams in the country and to supervise the auditors.

  • Whistle Blower Protection Act (2014) – The rights of this act has not been implemented till now.

  • Prevention of Corruption ( Amendment) Act 2018 – Amendments were made to this Act in July 2018 because of which anti grafts provision under this act have been made more strong.

  • Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013 – It came into force on 1st January 2014


Ombudsman

It is a Sweden concept and a system wherein citizens problems and grievances is solved by an independent authority. Lokpal is an Indian synonym for Ombudsman which was coined by Laxmi Mall Singhvi. The Lokpal is an authority which is independent of the legislature, executive, and judiciary and it can take suo moto cognizance of matters relating to citizens problems and can start the investigation.


History

  • To address the grievances and problems of citizenship the first Administrative Reform Commission was established in 1966 headed by Moraji Desai. This commission submitted its report stating that to redress the issues of citizens, two special authorities needs to be set up:

  • Lokpal ( for the union)

  • Lokyukta ( for the states)

  • Lokpal bil was first introduced in the Lok Sabha in 1968 but after the protests of various civil societies we finally had the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013.


Provisions of the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013

  1. Establishment and Composition

  • The establishment of the Lokpal is given in Section 3 of the act which states that:

    •  Lokpal should consist of a chairperson which can ex/current Chief Justice of India or a judge of the Supreme Court or an eminent person.

    • Apart from the chairperson, it can have maximum of 8 members of which 4 are judicial members who are either judge of Supreme court or chief justice of any high court and 4 non judicial members who have impeccable integrity, special knowledge in their field and have expertise of 25 years.

    • The act also stresses on the inclusion SC’s, ST’s, OBC, women and minorities.

  1. Selection Committee

  • The provisions for selection Committee are are given in Section 4.

  • The selection Committee consists of five people

  • Prime minister

  • Speaker

  • Leader of opposition

  • Chief justice of India (or another judge nominated by him)

  • Eminent jurist

  • This committee create a panel of 7 people which is known as the search committee.

  • The main work of the search committee is to create a list of persons who can be a member of the Lokpal committee.


Tenure of the chairperson and other members of the Lokpal committee (Section 6)


  • The term will be of five years or until the age of 70 years.

  • The chairperson or any other member can be anyone except:

  • MP

  • MLA

  • Hold office of profit.


Jurisdiction ( Section 14)

 Jurisdiction of Lokpal to include

  • Prime Minister

  • Ministers

  • Members of Parliament

  • Group A, B, C and D officers

  • Officials of Central Government
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more