Why the Lokpal Bill may prove to be a 'band-aid' solution?

Why the Lokpal Bill may prove to be a 'band-aid' solution?

Regulators never want to get regulated. Avoiding being avoided by the general public they have little respite from the flurry of chappals, sandals, boots and ‘fasts’ in dilly dallying the Lokpal Bill which in principal regulates the legislators but in practice is likely to change little in light of corrupt intent and bounded self control on the part of ‘powerhouses’ in the public domain.

There is some consensus in the ‘civil society’ on the need for a Lokpal Bill and Anna gets thumbs up for leading the movement and mobilizing public opinion in favor of the bill. But does it solve the problem it is being designed for? Will corrupt be less corrupt and will the bill prevail on the people who are part of its designing process? I doubt and it’s not because I am being pessimistic; but I’m rather being realistic.

Why do we need a Lokpal in the first place when we have an independent judiciary? Is it because we want to conduct enquiries and hold accountable the public servants outside the judicial process? Is it because we believe the Lokpal will be more independent, fair, unbiased and swift in dealing with matters related to corruption. Judiciary (at least in its theoretical context) qualifies on all three parameters of independence, fair and being unbiased but it fails miserably on the last parameter of acting swiftly. Once the matter gets sub judice, everyone can take a pillow and sleep. It would take an eternity to pronounce judgment even in cases which are crystal clear.

The making of Lokpal bill itself has proved to be quite a slug fight between the government and the civil society representatives. But even that being set aside I have a problem with the way civil society representatives were appointed on the Lokpal panel. Anna fasted for Lokpal , and people supported it but you can let him dictate his representatives on the panel if he fasted for it. A broad based representation from a cross section of the society would have been better.

Another question that is left unattended is who appoints the Lokpal and what the provisions for his removal are? It is so easy for those who will be covered under Lokpal to have the remote control for appointment / removal of Lokpal in their hand. Also they may deliberately try to keep the Lokpal understaffed to overburden them with work and thus less effectiveness.

The movement against corrupt is not what I have problem with; rather it’s the loopholes Lokpal will be unable to plug that bothers me. I believe comprehensive judicial reforms are more likely to provide a long term and sustainable solution to changing the overall landscape of social security and increasing accountability in India including addressing problems like corruption and tax evasion etc. For if the judiciary continues to delay justice, band-aid measures like Lokpal will lose steam soon.