COMMENTS

Dear admin, can you please post the contact details of the lokayukta here.
They are supposed to have a call in number, websites etc.
At least readers can get intouch with them
-- PhotoYogi

• thumb_up 37 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

Karnataka Lokayukta Webpage

Multi Store Building,
Dr, Ambedkar Vedhi,, Bangalore, Karnataka 500001, India
+91 80 22257013.

Website gives more info about complaints etc

• thumb_up 42 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

• thumb_up 33 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

Some topics that caught my attention were

a ) Firstly all government officials must understand that they are "government servants" and its their duty to do work. and we citizens should not be treating them as gods.

b) All IAS & IPS officers must declare all assets & liabilities of 260 odd officers only 3 of them have done so so far

c) Sec 17 of book of prevention of corruption must be abolished, As this is an ancient law introduced by the British to protect their officers. There is another organisation (Transparency international) who are already working towards this. (can some one please give a pdf link to this document)

d) Today's law sees a Bribe Giver as an equal party to the crime. But the Bribe giver is sure to get arrested where as the Govt servant is likely to get away because of the immunity he enjoys.

e) If you complain to Lokayukta about a building construction violation, Lokayukta only has the powers to question the official in charge who approved the irregularity. However, one should press legal charges against the builder directly to stop the construction.

These points were elaborated with several real examples. Justice Santosh Hegde narrated to us some with big names too. I am not sure if i can go Verbatim on the same.

--
PhotoYogi

• thumb_up 38 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

The two big thoughts that ran through my head as I left Justice Hegde's office after the meeting were:

1. These guys must be frustrated on two counts. A) Not many citizens come forward and complain. Sample this, the 24/7 Loayukta helpline gets a paltry 40 calls a day. Thats it. B) In most cases, after having caught a bribe taker via a trap, or having unearthed unaccounted property via raids, they have to live with the govt officer getting away with a transfer or light suspension or in many cases nothing much if LA office doesn't get government's sanction to prosecute
2. Why is it that not many NGO types are engaged with Lokayukta? My first question to Justice Hegde was - "do citizen bodies work with you ...", and he said only one has worked in recent past, and there too, they promised to help with something and then perhaps lost interest. I thought that this (LA) is one place where we really can do things to help.

But then, some words of caution on both above points.

• Despite their frustrations, they are a very very enthusiastic bunch, all three individuals we met came across as very driven guys no matter what!
• About helping Lokayukta, we got to be careful as perhaps there would be an element of risk involved.

Some recent cases they narrated to us, esp the one that Mr Riaz told us (recall the recent news about a BDA engineer getting caught taking bribe, and the bribe taker too was arrested) left me stunned. Not that we don't hear or or see this stuff  in gossip circles and movies, but thinking that Lokayukta office has to live with watching people get away is shocking.

To the laymen, let me explain what I understood of the problem around this jargon called suo motu powers. Lets say Lokayukta has solid evidence against a corrupt babu. He can't go after that babu till some person or organization files a formal complaint . Further, there is no provision to provide anonymity to the complainant. So, in a nutshell, a bunch of people can't just drop a CD in his office, walk away, and then expect LA's office to do something. In fact, he had a CD sitting on his table with detailed evidence of irregularities at a big name builder's project, but he said that he can't do a thing unless someone come forwards as a complainant.

For the sake of a balanced discussion, one must understand that there probably are some arguments against giving such powers powers to LA as well. LA's office could be misused, say by the government themselves to selectively make him go after the individuals they dislike. When his office would get flooded with 1000 calls a day, who will dictate which one he should go after first? Next, you are taking a chance with Lokayukta as a person as well, what if the next person after Justice Hegde turns out to be a corrupt man himself? Pay Lokayokta some money, and get your enemy behind the bars - would that be a possibility?

I vaguely asked a question on these lines to Justice Hegde, and he said that there is a "check" on his office as well. Judiciary has the rights to investigate his actions. I assume this means that if the aggrieved party feels being victimized, they could approach courts to get Lokayukta's actions in that particular case investigated.

If such a check is in place, whats the problem with suo motu powers? As long as his office pursues all cases with powerful and documented evidences, whats our problem who he goes after and who he does not? If he could work transparently based on just evidences, imagine how much help he could get from general public in collecting evidences and building his cases against corrupt officials.

We talked and heard so much. Tough to type it all.

• thumb_up 39 Likes
• · login or register to post comments