“Without strong watchdog institutions, impunity becomes the very foundation upon which systems of corruption are built. And if impunity is not demolished, all efforts to bring an end to corruption are in vain.” — Rigoberta Menchú, Nobel Prize laureate
By Suresh Unnithan
It’s paradoxical; an institution against corruption is being disarmed by a government lead by CPI (M), the revolutionary party vocal against corruption. With the Governor Arif Mohammad Khan putting his stamp on the controversial ordinance to amend the Kerala Lokayukta Act, the much lauded anti-corruption watchdog of Kerala has lost its teeth. The Ordinance repeals Section 14 of the Kerala Lokayukta Act, under which a public servant was required to vacate the office immediately, if indicted by Lokayukta. With this amendment the Lokayukta is relegated to a recommendatory authority with little mandatory jurisdiction.
It’s ironic, the Kerala Lok Ayukta Act, 1999 passed by the then LDF government headed by veteran CPI(M) leader E K Nayanar is now neutralized by the incumbent CPI(M)-led state government. Interestingly, when the all powerful anti-corruption Lok Ayukta Act was legislated, Pinarayi Vijayan was the state secretary of the ruling CPI (M). He was the state secretary of the party from 1998 to 2015 uninterrupted. Interestingly, during his tenure as secretary Vijayan never felt the Kerala Lok Ayukta Act “unconstitutional” or it “infringes upon the rights of a Cabinet”. But, now in his successive second term as chief minister, Vijayan sees “a potential threat” to “natural justice” from the legally established anti-corruption watchdog-Lokayukta.
As mentioned above the new amendment takes away Section 14 of the Kerala Lokayukta Act, which has been a threat to the Corrupt within the government and in public services. Section 14 says “Public Servant to vacate office if directed by Lokayukta etc.-(1) Where, after investigation into a complaint, the Lokayukta or an Upa-Lokayukta is satisfied that the complaint involving an allegation against the public servant is substantiated and that the public servant concerned should not continue to hold the post held by him, the Lokayukta or the Upa-Lokayukta, as the case may be, shall make a declaration to that effect in his report under sub-section (3) of section 12. Where the competent authority is the Governor, the Government of Kerala or the Chief Minister, he or it shall accept the declaration. In other cases, the competent authority concerned shall send a copy of such report to the Government, which shall accept the declaration.”
State Law Minister P Rajeev, hitherto considered a politician intolerant to corruption, also feels the “urgency” of amending the current Kerala Lokayukta Act passed by a previous CPI (M)-led government. According to the learned law minister the 23 year old Act “denies natural justice as there is no provision for even an appeal.” Regarding the repeal of Section 14 of the act the Law Minister “it is against Articles of 163 and 164 of the Constitution. The Lokayukta infringes upon the rights of a Cabinet.”
In fact the provision in the 1999 Act that makes the directions of the Lokayukta binding has irked many in power, particularly in the case of K T Jaleel. The Kerala Lokayukta in its verdict on April 11, 2021 had indicted the then K T Jaleel for nepotism and abuse of power and the Watchdog directed the competent authority to drop the ‘guilty’ from the previous Pinarayi Cabinet. Though Jaleel has approached both the High Court and Supreme Court, could not get any relief and had to quit the LDF Ministry in dispirited.
As per the Act “When the Lokayukta finds the public servant in question guilty of the allegations, the former will inform the Governor or the CM as a declaration — a declaration that the public servant is unfit to hold the post. This declaration is binding on the government, which means the Governor or the CM should accept it.”
Accusing the Government of trying to protect the corrupt by through reining in the anti-corruption watchdogs opposition leader V D Satheesan has said, “The Lokayukta Act was there for last 23 years and what was the urgency to amend it now.” He says “the government is scared after three cases against the CM are coming up before the anti-corruption body.” The government is trying an escape route by curtailing powers of the body. It is a shameful act from the Left Government.”
However, Kodiyeri Balakrishnan, the state chief of the ruling CPI (M) fully supports the amendment of the Act, for he “seriously” apprehends that the watchdog in its present form has the power to unseat an elected government if charges of corruption are proved. “The powers were so sweeping that the Lokayukta could unseat the government in power.”
Commenting on the statement of the CPI(M) chief a senior journalist said, “It seems the party committed to eradication of corruption from the system is now compromising its core values. The party pleaded for transparency in governance is today stooping to this loathsome level. The current amendment of the Act will deflate the Lokayukta and that will help the corrupt to thrive.”
Expressing his anguish on the ordinance former Kerala Upa-Lokayukta (retired Justice) KP Balachandran has said, to kill is easy, but to give life is difficult. If the powers are tweaked, the best thing is to dissolve this institution (Lokayukta).”
Lokayukta was constituted to investigate complaints of corruption against government officers in public offices. Corruption is defined as “dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power.”
In the words of Joe Biden, president of the United States “Corruption is a cancer, a cancer that eats away at a citizen’s faith in democracy, diminishes the instinct for innovation and creativity.”
Delia Ferreira, chair of Transparency International says “People’s indifference is the best breeding ground for corruption to grow.”
Hence, “To oppose corruption in government is the highest obligation of patriotism.” As renowned Austrian writer and journalist Karl Kraus said “Corruption is worse than prostitution. The latter might endanger the morals of an individual; the former invariably endangers the morals of the entire country.”
