The government got the amendments to the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 passed in both the houses of the parliament.
In this context, criminalizing bribe-giving and time-bound trial are among the measures that will have immense positive implications.
What are the positives in the bill?
Bribe Giving - While Bribe taking is a recognized crime, bribe giving isn't a crime under current law, which is a loophole.
Introduction of this provision is in fulfillment of India’s commitment under the UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) ratified in 2011.
Notably, it is currently difficult to penalize commercial organizations involved in corruption, when the supply side of corruption is not criminalized.
If the current amendments are passed, the commercial organization shall be punished with fine, if any person associated with them bribes officials.
Gains - A public servant can currently be held guilty even if actions haven't resulted in any personal benefits but have caused undue loss to the government.
This clause is the most used one by CBI in booking cases against officials.
This had generated a fear psychosis and was slowing down policy decisions.
The amendment bill proposes to drop this provision to facilitate confidence among officials to take honest decisions without fear of prosecution.
Checks - The new bill has diluted the power of investigating agencies to prosecute public servants, by mandating prior approval from higher ups.
While this is a dilution, it has been deliberately introduced in favour of public servants in order to avoid undue harassment.
Hence, no police officer can directly conduct any inquiry in future, against a serving or retired public servant regarding the official duties.
Nonetheless, the approval-granting authority has to grant or reject the request within 3 months, and this can be challenged in court as well.
Rightly, this provision has not been made applicable for cases involving arrest of the public servant caught red handed for taking a bribe.
Hearing Out - While now, officials face a plenty of cases filed by the public against them, the new bill proposes to safeguard them from this harassment.
It seeks to commission a mandatory hearing from the accused official before proceeding to start an investigation into the alleged complaint.
Confiscations - Unfortunately, existing anti-corruption legislation does not have inherent provisions to seize properties of those guilty of corruption.
In the new bill, a provision has been introduced for confiscation of money or property procured by illegal means, if the accused is pronounced guilty.
What are the challenges?
Specifics - Some believe that these changes would give officials a free hand to cheat the public through the strong protections that are being built into it for them.
Further, criminalization of bribe-giving could result in undue victimization of the public despite the clauses for protecting those coerced to give bribes.
General - One of the hurdles connected with conviction of public servants is that trial of cases in a court of law takes many years for their conclusion.
As there are a significant number of corruption cases pending for conclusion of trial, the new bill has sought daily hearing for anti-corruption cases.
The bill also seeks to set a 4 year time limit for ending the hearing of the entire corruption case in order to convict/acquit a public servant in a short time.
Further, as corruption has become systemic, wholesome systemic changes are needed to ensure that corruption is effectively curbed.
