The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the Government’s reluctance to introduce the office of lokpal. The court noted that the ambitious legislation meant to achieve probity in public life was kept on the backburner for want of change in the law pending in Parliament for past three years.
The lokpal and lokayukta Act 2013 became law in January 2014, but the Act could not be operational as one of the criteria for selection of lokpal requires the presence of leader of Opposition in the Selection Committee. In the absence of any political party commanding one-tenth strength of the House to be chosen as the leading Opposition party, an amendment was moved the same year to substitute leader of Opposition with the leader of the single largest party in the House.
With three years on and the amendment yet to see the light of the day, the bench of Chief Justice TS Thakur, Justices DY Chandrachud and lN Rao was critical of the Government's intention to introduce the lokpal. Hearing a petition filed by NGO Common Cause, the bench said, “If lokpal is meant to be an institution for ensuring probity in public life, it must work regardless of the Parliament passing the amendment. It is sad that an institution has been set up but its languishing for want of a leader of Opposition.”
Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi who appeared for Centre said that the Parliament was interested to make the Act operational. “How can we overcome a Parliamentary process. The amendment is pending with the House. It provides for leader of the largest party. We don't know when the amendment will arrive,” A-G said.
Senior advocate Shanti Bhushan who appeared for Common Cause requested the Court to step in and clarify that the leader of Opposition is to be read as leader of the largest party. “They could have introduced this even through an ordinance. But the political will is lacking.” He showed four other legislations in which the term leader of Opposition was replaced with the leader of the single largest party.
The bench asked Rohatgi, “No selection process will inspire confidence if you don't have the Opposition as its part. What is the difficulty of extending the same logic (as in other legislations) to the lokpal Act…You must be consistent in what you have done in the other enactments with what you do in this Act.” The Court gave time till December 7 for the Centre to seek instructions as the petitioner demanded a timeframe for lokpal's implementation.