The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013

Anna Hazare's hunger strike at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi

The 2010 draft[36] was created by the United Progressive Alliance to create an Ombudsman tasked with tackling political corruption.[37] The draft was circulated to various ministries for their review. It provided a mechanism for filing complaints against the prime minister, ministers and MPs.[38] However, civil society groups were not satisfied and rejected it as a toothless body with only recommendatory powers.[39][40]

Hazare started an indefinite hunger strike on 5 April 2011 to pressure the government to create an ombudsman with the power to deal with corruption in public places as envisaged in the Jan Lokpal Bill. The fast led to nationwide protests in support. The fast ended on 9 April, one day after the government accepted his demands.[41] The government issued a gazette notification on the formation of a joint committee, consisting of government and civil society representatives, to draft the legislation.[42]

A Joint Drafting Committee was established, consisting of five ministers and five members of the civil society. The chairman of the Joint Drafting Committee was Pranab Mukherjee. The Committee set 30 June 2011 as the deadline to complete the drafting process.[43][44]

All of the Joint Draft meetings took place at the North Block

The Committee first met on 16 April 2011, in the North Block and lasted for about ninety minutes.[45] Team Anna presented their version of the bill with a slight modification relating to the selection panel to choose the Lokpal and its members. Under the revised proposal, the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha were replaced with the Rajya Sabha chairman and the Lok Sabha Speaker. The meeting was allegedly recorded and the Committee claimed that decisions would be made available to the general public. HRD Minister and Committee member Kapil Sibal, said that both the sides were keen that the new Bill should be introduced in the Monsoon session, which would begin early July.[46][47]

The Committee met as planned on 2 May 2011. The meeting was termed "very good" and with "no difference of opinion" between the panel members.[48] Sibal said that the meeting discussed the document presented previously by the civil society members. Prashant Bhushan said, "The meeting was mainly to discuss the basic principles behind the Jan Lokpal Bill. The discussion was on essential features, objects and reasons of the bill which have been prepared according to the main provisions of the UN Convention against Corruption. All signatories of the United Nations Convention against Corruption have to pass this kind of law."[49][50] In May 2011, the Indian Government had ratified two UN Conventions – the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) and the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime (UNTOC) and its three protocols.[51][52]

Kapil Sibbal, member of the Joint Drafting Committee of Lokpal

After the third meeting on 7 May 2011, Bhushan said "Lokpal will have powers to initiate investigation and prosecution and will not need permission from the government. The model on which the financial independence will be based is yet to be decided. Various models were discussed, including from other countries and of institutions like the Supreme Court, the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Central Vigilance Commission."[53]

Kapil Sibal said the meeting was "exceptionally constructive" and added, "The approach was very constructive. There were areas of broad agreement, including the process of appointment of Lokpal which should be transparent."[54] Another group of civil society members led by Aruna Roy and Harsh Mander working for a strong Lokpal Bill, upped its ante against Team Anna. Under the banner of the "National Campaign for People's Right to Information" (NCPRI)[55] they claimed that Anna's diktat could be dangerous and that the government's functioning could not be handled by one group.[56][57]

The 23 May meeting in 2011 lasted over three hours and the two sides agreed "in-principle" on half of the 40 basic principles for the anti-graft Lokpal bill proposed by the civil society members.[58][59][60]

At the 30 May 2011 meeting the chairman made it clear during the discussion that the matters pertaining to the exclusion of Prime Minister, Judiciary would be a part of the discussions on the scope of the Lokpal. The Chairman of the Panel announced that the conduct of the MPs' inside Parliament would remain outside its remit of the Lokpal to comply with [Article 105(2)] of the Constitution and that the views of the State and the political parties would be discussed with the civil society members.[61] These announcements created a stalemate between the Committee's two-halves.[62]

Team Anna boycotted 6 June 2011 meeting, alleging that the police crackdown on Baba Ramdev had "strengthened the doubts" about the government's intentions and demanded that the next meeting be rescheduled because of Hazare's other commitments.[63] Shanti Bhushan produced a letter that was read by the Chair "indicating their inability to attend the meeting" and "that what happened at the Ramlila ground had nothing to do with the proceedings of the Joint Drafting Committee". The chairman suggested that the drafting should be the focus. Post meeting, the draft was to be circulated to the other political parties for their consideration. They rescheduled the seventh meeting to 15 June.[64][65]

The two-hour event took place on 15 June 2011, without agreement on several issues. Both sides furnished versions to the Union Cabinet for consideration.[66] Team Anna blamed the government for not being serious, claiming "The government is planning to kill Lokpal before it's born".[67] The civil society members suggested that the Lokpal be empowered to probe corruption cases in instead of the departmental probes and CBI inquiries of the prior approach. The government rejected the idea. Chief Ministers of several BJP-ruled states expressed surprise that they were being consulted before the final draft was ready. Chief ministers of Congress-ruled states backed the Centre's stand and opposed bringing the prime minister under the Lokpal's ambit. BJP-ruled states sought wider deliberations. Opposition parties demanded to comment on the whole bill rather than on the six contentious issues.[68] Anna Team demanded that the audio of the proceedings be made available to them. Hazare threatened to resume an indefinite fast if the bill was not passed by 15 August.[69][70]

The government moved its version of the bill[1] in the Lok Sabha on 4 August, the ninth such introduction. The bill was introduced by the Minister of State in the Prime Minister's Office, V Narayanasamy. Leader of Opposition Sushma Swaraj opposed the exclusion of the prime minister from the purview of the proposed Lokpal. V Narayanasamy told the House that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was in favour of bringing his office under the purview of the Lokpal, but the Cabinet rejected the idea after deliberation.[72] Anna Hazare burnt copies of the bill, to protest the government's lack of sincerity.[73][74]

On 27 August the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha passed a Pranab Mukherjee-proposed resolution conveying the sense of the House on the Lokpal Bill.[75] The House agreed 'in principle' on a Citizen's Charter, placing the lower bureaucracy under the Lokpal and establishing the Lokayukta in the States.[76]

The Act was finally notified by President of India on 1 January 2014,after getting approved in both Houses of Parliament and Union Cabinet, providing for setting up of a institution of Lokpal, to be headed by a Chairperson, who is or has been a Chief Justice of India, or is or has been a judge of the Supreme Court, or a person of eminence fulfilling the eligibility criteria as specified in the Act.[77] The Act also provides for the appointment of other members, which shall not exceed eight, of which 50% are to be judicial members, and among others not less than 50% of the members belong to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, OBCs, minorities, and women.

The Act provides for the appointment of a director of inquiry who shall not be below the rank of Joint Secretary to the Government of India and shall be appointed by the Central government for conducting preliminary inquiries in respect of public servants belonging to groups A, B, C or D and who are referred by the Lokpal to the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC).[78]

The Jan Lokpal Bill was submitted to the committee by Congress MP from Bareilly Praveen Singh Aron.[80] The draft bill was distributed to members on 28 November. The committee recommended keeping judiciary and MPs' out of the Lokpal's purview and rejected the demand to move the prosecution wing of CBI under its jurisdiction. Committee members had unanimously recommended conferring constitutional status on the Lokpal and setting up of Lokpal and Lokayuktas in states under one bill. The draft document did not take a position on the inclusion of prime minister. Another of Team Anna's demands for inclusion of entire bureaucracy was turned down, given that the draft favoured inclusion of Group A and B officials, leaving out C and D staff.[81][82] Anna Hazare rejected this draft.[83][84][85]

At the final meeting on 7 December they decided to bring Group C and D officers under the ambit of state Lokayuktas.[86] Sixteen dissent notes were submitted at the meeting by members from BJP, BJD, SP, Congress, RJD and the Left.[87]

Hamid Ansari, Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, adjourned the house sine die

The ombudsman debate was taken up by The Rajya Sabha during the last day of the three-day extension of the winter session of Parliament, but the body recessed on 29 December without voting.[100][101] The bill was debated for over 12 hours ending abruptly at midnight as the House ran out of scheduled time. The House was adjourned sine die by Chairman Hamid Ansari. A verbal duel marred proceedings as some members including UPA ally Trinamool Congress interrupted V. Narayanasamy's defence of the Bill.[102] A vociferous opposition insisted on a vote while the government maintained it needed time to reconcile the 187 amendments/ Confusion marked the proceedings. Ansari asked for the national anthem Jana Gana Mana to be played, signalling the end of the proceedings and told the house:

This is an unprecedented situation…there appears to be a desire to outshout each other. There is a total impasse. The House cannot be conducted in the noise that requires orderly proceedings, I am afraid the Chair has no option…most reluctantly…I am afraid I can't and…

After a 15-minute adjournment between 11.30 and 11.45 PM, Pawan Kumar Bansal said that the decision on extension of the House was the government's prerogative. Leader of the Opposition Arun Jaitley charged that the government was running away from Parliament and that the House should decide how long it should sit. He added:

You are creating an institution where you control the appointment mechanism, where you control the removal mechanism. We will support the appointment of the Lokpal procedures, but we cannot be disloyal to our commitment to create an integrity institution.[100]

Sitaram Yechury (CPI-M) said the House had expected the bill on Wednesday, but it came only on Thursday, the last day of the session. Derek O'Brien said "This is a shameful day for India's democracy. The government handled this situation very badly."[102] As the Opposition insisted on a vote, Bansal said the government was willing provided that the House passed the Bill voted by the Lok Sabha on Tuesday. This meant that the proposed amendments would have to be set aside.

As stalemate and wrangling continued, the chairman called an end to the proceedings.[103][104] Chidambaram defended the deferment of Lokpal and Lokayukta Bill, 2011 in Rajya Sabha on 29 December contending that it was the "only prudent course" before the government and that it had ensured that the Bill remained alive. He continued to attack the BJP and called the amendments an "ingenious" method to scuttle the bill.[105] Hazare called off his hunger strike prematurely, blaming poor health.[106]

Activists pushing hoped that the House would approve the bill towards the end of the second half of the budget session of 2012. The bill was re-introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 21 May 2012.[108] While moving the bill, the minister said that the differences had been narrowed. He said that the government proposed to bring the lower bureaucracy under the Lokpal, which would have investigation and prosecution powers. CVC would monitor Lokpal-referred investigations by the CBI. There would be provisions for attaching properties and a time-frame for investigations. An amendment was proposed whereby the states would pass the bill so the national law would not be forced upon states. After the amended bill was introduced, Narayanasamy, Samajwadi Party member Naresh Agrawal sought to send the bill to a select committee. This was strongly objected to by BJP, the Left parties and BSP, with their members arguing that only the minister concerned (Narayanasamy) could do so and accusing the ruling coalition of "using the shoulder" of a "friendly opposition" party. After high drama the government yielded and Narayanasamy moved the motion, which immediately passed by voice vote. The 15-member select committee was to submit its report by the first day of the last week of the Monsoon Session.[109][110]

The committee met on 25 June and decided on "wider consultations" with the government officials and the public.[111] The panel invited public comments and called representatives of various ministries for recording evidence.[112] The meeting was headed by senior Congress MP Satyavrat Chaturvedi.[111] Law Secretary B A Agarwal was summoned to clarify various matters.[112] The committee met again on 19 July 2012. The director of the CBI aired his views in the meeting. He made it clear that the CBI is open to changes in the Lokpal bill that strengthen the agency's autonomy by enhancing the proposed Lokpal's role in key appointments like those of director, head of prosecution and lawyers who represent CBI. He also mentioned in the meeting that the Lokpal should be given a significant say in appointing the director of the prosecution wing instead of the process being controlled by the law ministry as is currently the procedure, the persistent criticism about CBI's investigations being throttled by political directives could be addressed as well. He opposed making the prosecution or the anti-corruption wings subservient to the Lokpal. The select committee had in its earlier sittings examined senior law officials who agreed with the members that the prescription for lokayuktas under Article 253 that refers to fulfilment of international obligations – in this case the UN convention against corruption – might not be feasible. Recourse to international treaties to frame a law that impact the federal structure is not within the ambit of the law. The Select committee referred the Bill for Public Suggestions in July 2012. In reply hundreds of responses were received to the Rajya Sabha. The committee took a view and shortlisted certain recommendations and took Oral Evidence in physical presence of the Members. Committee considered some of the most valid suggestions being done by the Members. Mr. Deepak Tongli of Hyderabad had come with a proposal of setting up the lower most unit to keep regular check on Anti Corruption in petty cases at District Level. In addition few other members also shared their views in this regard. Mr. Tongli, 26 yrs aged happened to be the youngest person to appear before the Parliamentary committee for Oral Evidence at Rajya Sabha.[113]

The monsoon session of parliament was to be held in August 2012. Hence, a bill that is pending before the upper house whether or not it was passed by the Lok Sabha, does not lapse on its dissolution. Hence, the bill is still alive in its present form.[114] The bill was not expected to be tabled in the Rajya Sabha before the first day of the last week of the session.[115]