Context:
The recent Supreme Court stay on the Lokpal’s order which has brought High Court judges under its jurisdiction is of serious legal and constitutional concern and merits proper deliberation.
Lokpal and Lokayukta
The Lokpal is an anti-corruption body in India that investigates allegations of corruption against public officials. The word “Lokpal” is Sanskrit for “defender of the people”.
How does the Lokpal work?
- The Lokpal is a statutory body established by the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act of 2013.
- The Lokpal has a chairperson and up to eight members, including at least four judicial members.
- The jurisdiction of the Lokpal includes the Prime Minister, ministers, Members of Parliament, and government employees.
- The chairperson of the Lokpal is empowered to transfer cases to benches.
What is the major difference between the Lokpal and the Lokayukta?
- While the Lokpal is a national institution, the Lokayukta is a state institution.
- Both the Lokpal and the Lokayukta are headed by a panel of judges or retired judges.
- Both the Lokpal and the Lokayukta have the power to investigate and file prosecution against corrupt practices.
- History
- In the fourth Lok Sabha, the first Lokpal Act was brought into conceptualization in 1968.
- Coined first in 1963 by Dr. L.M.Singhvi.
Recent Updates of the Supreme Court
The Independence of Judiciary Under Threat
- A threat to judicial independence was underlined by the Supreme Court bench consisting of Justices B.R. Gavai, Surya Kant, and A.S. Oka, emphasizing the Lokpal and its interpretation.
- In fact, an independent judiciary is one of the basic features of the Constitution and, therefore, must be maintained for the sake of separation of powers and the executive, legislature, and judiciary.
Disturbing Expansion of Jurisdiction of the Lokpal
- Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act of 2013 was to eliminate public corruption among official classes, including ministers and bureaucrats.
- Yet the judges emerge somewhere in the law as a gray area, just shy of being swept under the expression of public servants in the Lokpal’s jurisdiction.
- The Lokpal order of January 27, under then-chair Justice A.M. Khanwilkar (retired Supreme Court judge), found that High Court judges were public servants liable for investigation under the Act.
- Such interpretation, considered by the Supreme Court, is problematic and legally ill-founded.
The Case Whose Complaints Triggered the Controversy
- There was a complaint against a High Court judge to the effect that:
- The judge influenced an Additional District Judge to decide in favor of a private company.
- The company had been a client of the judge when they were a practicing lawyer.
- Based on this allegation, Lokpal ruled that High Court judges were covered by its jurisdiction, prompting interference from the Supreme Court.
What Consequences Are There For Lawyers And Or Constitutional Law?
- If the Lokpal walks into a matter involving judges, it would create a demeritorious precedent to interfere with executive matters in the judiciary.
- What Is In Place To Guarantee Accountability For Judges?
- Judges are impeached under a fair process contained in Article 124 and 217 of the Constitution for proving cases of misconduct.
- Cases pertaining to corruption of judges are primarily resolved through internal systems of the Supreme Court and relevant High Court.
- Which are the expected legal issues?
- Would these judges amount to public servants under the present act dealing with corruption?
- If they do, who should investigate – the Lokpal, CBI, or an agency overseeing the judiciary?
Supreme Court stays are considered to be a loud judicial protest against outside control in Lokpal’s affairs. Maintaining independence of judges, we can hardly therefore permit the Lokpal to investigate judges. The hearing on March 18 will provide important groundwork for a legal precedent, which is expected to shape their future inter-relationship of judiciary-anti corruption ombudsman.
