Latest news with #LokpalandLokayuktasAct
The Print
17-07-2025
- Politics
- The Print
CJI's involvement in selection of CBI director is a safeguard, not a subversion
The insertion of judicial oversight was neither accidental nor theoretical. Vineet Narain v. Union of India (1997) emerged from the public shock of the Jain Hawala diaries, its essence was doctrinal, not defensive. The Supreme Court held that the need of the hour is to insulate the CBI from extraneous influence. It insisted on structural measures, not temporary decrees. Parliament listened: the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 entrenched a tripartite panel for the selection of the CBI director — the PM, LoP, and the CJI or his nominee — forming a legal bond between democratic design and historical necessity. The CJI's statutory presence in appointing the head of the nation's premier investigative agency is not a fluke of legal drafting, it is a structural feature. It is a successor to experiences where power went unchecked: the Emergency's weaponisation of law, the Hawala scandal's institutional paralysis. 'Republics are formed, not found,' wrote Philip Bobbitt in The Shield of Achilles , capturing the intentional craftsmanship behind modern constitutionalism. They are not gifts of history, but acts of memory, of caution, of design. Constitutions are not accidental artefacts, they are blueprints of humility, instruments to channel and control power. When the Vice President raises concern over the Chief Justice of India's role in appointing the CBI Director, he touches not on privilege, but on architecture. This is not abstract theory; it is the grammar of a functioning republic. India did not choose the American isolation of powers or the British concentration. We chose a tensioned architecture, where each power leans against the other, not to destabilise, but to steady. Perception and principle If anyone doubts the continuing vitality of that design, recent jurisprudence confirms it. In Common Cause v. Union of India (2021), the Supreme Court upheld statutory requirements for fixed tenure, noting that transparency in appointment and continuity in office are 'constitutional imperatives that flow from independence.' It struck down executive efforts to circumvent the panel. In Dr. Jaya Thakur v. Union of India (2023), the SC further condemned post-tenure extensions as injurious to public perception: where 'perceived capture' prevails, institutional legitimacy collapses. This is not unique to India. Across democratic orders, judicial participation in appointments to sensitive public offices is a safeguard, not a subversion. In the United Kingdom, the Judicial Appointments Commission includes judges in appointments beyond the bench, extending into review boards for oversight bodies. In Canada, judicial members sit on selection panels for integrity commissioners, privacy regulators, and national security review boards. South Africa's Chief Justice serves as the chairperson of the Judicial Service Commission, which advises on prosecutorial oversight. In Israel, the Attorney General, akin to the CBI Director, emerges from a multi-stakeholder process that includes judicial members. Indeed, to place entire control of coercive institutions within the executive is not an act of democracy, it is Hobbes without honesty. It is a rehearsal of Leviathan, cloaked in constitutional formalities but stripped of institutional conscience. The CJI's seat at the table is not a throne, it is ballast. It prevents the investigative state from drifting toward political shores. As constitutional scholar Aharon Barak noted in the Israeli context, 'Judicial participation in public appointments is not to blur the boundary between powers, but to clarify their mutual restraint.' Concerns around post-retirement appointments of judges are not frivolous. They strike at the heart of perceived impartiality. But to conflate that concern with the statutory presence of the judiciary in a democratic appointment process is both analytically lazy and constitutionally unsound. The answer lies in reform, not removal. If Parliament is indeed serious, it may codify a cooling-off period, apply it prospectively and uniformly, and preserve both perception and principle. Also read: Shantonu Sen's CBI tenure was a long battle against corruption—and political interference A quiet reminder In K. Veeraswami v. Union of India, (1991) 3 SCC 655, the SC acknowledged that even unproven allegations can erode public confidence in the judiciary. But that danger cannot justify the dismantling of institutional checks elsewhere. Perception is vital but it must not overpower constitutional intention. One must also resist the urge to confuse participation with dominance. The CJI is one of the three members on the panel for the appointment of the CBI director. He does not hold a veto. His presence is not a counter majoritarian triumph, it is a quiet reminder that public power must not be shaped behind closed doors. To deride that presence as judicial intrusion is to forget the very scandals that demanded it. Yes, constitutions evolve, but they do so by memory, not amnesia. The appointment structure being criticised was crafted after inquiry committees, court orders, and parliamentary deliberation. It came not as an innovation but as an inheritance. To question it casually is to misremember our own institutional biography. As John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton warned, 'The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern.' That includes the Bench, the executive, and the legislature. Which is why the framers, and later Parliament, placed each beside the other, not to dominate, but to co-discipline. This is not the judiciary conquering executive space, nor the executive retreating into symbolism. This is equilibrium earned through political pain, preserved through constitutional memory. The author is an advocate practicing before the Supreme Court of India. Views are personal. (Edited by Aamaan Alam Khan)
Time of India
19-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
A decade after Act was enacted, Lokpal notifies constitution of prosecution wing
Representative Image More than a decade after Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act was enacted, the Lokpal, the anti-corruption ombudsman that probes complaints against public servants, has notified the constitution of its prosecution wing. The Lokpal is mandated to inquire into allegations of graft against specified public functionaries and all connected matters. Section 12 of Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 obligates the Lokpal to constitute a prosecution wing for proceeding against public servants over complaints by the agency. The Lokpal bench, at its meeting on Aug 30, 2024, decided to constitute both the inquiry and prosecution wings of the agency and authorised the chairperson to take steps necessary for the same. At a meeting on Sept 13, 2024, the full bench of the Lokpal approved the organogram laying down the staffing pattern and specified number of officers and staff, including for the prosecution wing.
Time of India
19-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Decade after Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act enacted, anti-corruption ombudsman notifies prosecution wing
NEW DELHI: More than a decade after the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act was enacted, the anti-corruption ombudsman for probing corruption complaints against public servants, has notified the constitution of its prosecution wing. The Lokpal's mandate is to inquire into the allegations of graft against specified public functionaries and all connected matters. Section 12 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 obligates the Lokpal to constitute a prosecution wing for the purpose of prosecution of public servants in relation to any complaint by the Lokpal under this Act, through a notification. The full Bench of the Lokpal had, in its meeting dated 13.09.2024, approved the organogram providing for the staffing pattern and specified number of suitable officers and staff, including for the prosecution wing, making it a part of the judicial wing. Further, the Bench in its meeting dated 30.08.2024, decided to constitute both the inquiry and prosecution wing of the Lokpal and authorized the chairperson to take such steps as may be necessary. 'However, at that time, considering the limited number of prosecution cases referred by the Lokpal, it was decided to initially constitute only the inquiry wing. Now, in the evolving scenario, as there has been an increase in the number of prosecution cases including ready for directing prosecution, the full bench vide its Resolution dated 05.06.2025, has decided to make the prosecution wing in Lokpal functional by going ahead with its own selection process for appointment of officers on deputation basis in the first place,' the order issued by Lokpal on June 6 had stated.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
12-06-2025
- Politics
- Business Standard
Lokpal invites CBI, ED officers on deputation for new inquiry wing
The Lokpal has sought applications from officers with experience in working with the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) to join its inquiry wing on deputation. The applications have been invited for filling up of various posts i.e., deputy director (DD)/superintendent of police (SP), inquiry/investigation officer, assistant inquiry/investigation officer and personal assistant in the inquiry wing of Lokpal of India on a deputation basis, according to an official circular. The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, came into force on January 1, 2014, when it received the assent of the President. However, it began functioning only on March 27, 2019, following the appointment of its chairperson and members. To discharge its statutory functions, Section 11 of the Act obligates the Lokpal to constitute an inquiry wing to conduct a preliminary inquiry into any offence punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, alleged to have been committed by the public servants and functionaries. On August 30, 2024, a full bench of Lokpal met and decided to constitute such an inquiry wing. It has sought applications for posts of DD/SP, four posts each of inquiry/investigation officer and assistant inquiry/investigation officer, and two posts of personal assistant. Officers of different central government services, CBI, ED, Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) and those belonging to state or Union Territory police bodies are eligible to apply, said the vacancy circular dated June 10. It said officers with experience in conducting investigation in general/economic & banking/cyber matters are desirable. The pay & allowances, HRA, transport allowance, joining time, travelling allowances & transfer TA, children education allowance, LTC, dearness allowance, medical facilities, leave and the other terms & conditions of the officers selected for appointment on deputation basis will be governed by the extant guidelines/rules as admissible to the central government employees, till the time the Lokpal Officers and Staff (Conditions of Service) Regulations, 2024 are notified, the circular said. The DD and SP will be provided the facility of pick and drop from residence to office and vice versa, and other staff members can avail the facility of pick and drop between office and the nearest metro station/bus stand, it added. The last date for receiving applications is 60 days from the date of issuance of the vacancy circular.
Time of India
12-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Lokpal seeks CBI, ED officers to join its inquiry wing
The Lokpal has sought applications from officers with experience in working with the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) to join its inquiry wing on deputation. The applications have been invited for filling up of various posts i.e., deputy director (DD)/superintendent of police (SP), inquiry/investigation officer, assistant inquiry/investigation officer and personal assistant in the inquiry wing of Lokpal of India on a deputation basis, according to an official circular. The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, came into force on January 1, 2014, when it received the assent of the President. However, it began functioning only on March 27, 2019, following the appointment of its chairperson and members. To discharge its statutory functions, Section 11 of the Act obligates the Lokpal to constitute an inquiry wing to conduct a preliminary inquiry into any offence punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act , 1988, alleged to have been committed by the public servants and functionaries. On August 30, 2024, a full bench of Lokpal met and decided to constitute such an inquiry wing. Live Events It has sought applications for posts of DD/SP, four posts each of inquiry/investigation officer and assistant inquiry/investigation officer, and two posts of personal assistant. Officers of different central government services, CBI, ED, Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) and those belonging to state or Union Territory police bodies are eligible to apply, said the vacancy circular dated June 10. It said officers with experience in conducting investigation in general/economic & banking/cyber matters are desirable. The pay & allowances, HRA, transport allowance, joining time, travelling allowances & transfer TA, children education allowance, LTC, dearness allowance, medical facilities, leave and the other terms & conditions of the officers selected for appointment on deputation basis will be governed by the extant guidelines/rules as admissible to the central government employees, till the time the Lokpal Officers and Staff (Conditions of Service) Regulations, 2024 are notified, the circular said. The DD and SP will be provided the facility of pick and drop from residence to office and vice versa, and other staff members can avail the facility of pick and drop between office and the nearest metro station/bus stand, it added. The last date for receiving applications is 60 days from the date of issuance of the vacancy circular. Economic Times WhatsApp channel )
