Amendments to the “Prevention of Corruption Act - 1988”
iasparliament
July 30, 2018
What is the issue?
The amendments to the “Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988”, was recently adopted recently by both Houses of Parliament.
While this is to safeguard government staff from malicious witch-hunts, a more comprehensive and nuanced approach is needed to end corruption.
Why is the “Prevention of Corruption Act” being amended?
Section 13 of the Act holds public servants culpable for securing a pecuniary advantage for another “without any public interest”.
This resulted in many honest officials being prosecuted even when they gained nothing and merely exercised their discretion in favour of someone.
Even former PM Manmohan Singh had criticised this provision as it is prone to misuse and affects decision making within the government.
Notably, even officials with the most honest of intentions tend to hesitate in making decisions if their actions are likely to be suspected and scrutinized.
Hence, the current government has proposed an amendment to rectify section 13 in order to make liberate officials from possible witch hunts.
What are the provisions envisioned in the new law?
The new version seeks to be more concise and restricts criminal misconduct to two offences namely:
Misappropriating public property for private gratification
Amassing unexplained wealth (beyond known sources of income).
The law also seeks to make citizens liable for offering a bribe to a public servant, which is in line with “UN Convention against Corruption”.
In situations where citizens are forced to give a bribe, the above provision doesn’t apply, provided the incidence is reported to authorities within a week.
What are the challenges involved?
Vulnerability - If the police or any other agency refuses to register complaints regarding instances of bribery, then the people are left in the lurch.
It may also render them vulnerable to threats from unscrupulous public servants who might completely refuse to further their papers.
Approval - A prior sanction requirement already exists in law before proceeding for prosecuting a public servant (after investigations conclude).
But the new law seeks a prior approval mechanism even before commencing investigations, which will only make it harder to deal with corruption.
What is the way ahead?
Public servants need to be protected against unfair prosecution, but a genuine drive against corruption needs a package of legislative measures.
The legal mandate needed include “penal clauses, independent ombudsmen like Lokpal, time stipulated services delivery and whistle-blower protection”.
As laws to fulfil these objectives are either not operational yet or haven’t been framed, the government needs to focus on these aspects.
