Ombudsman – Agadam Lokpal



Ombudsman means “the grievance man” or a “commissioner of the Administration”. A Precise definition of Ombudsman cannot be given. But Garner rightly says that he is “an Officer of Parliament, having as his primary function the duty of acting as an agent for Parliament, for the purpose of safeguarding citizens against abuse and misuse of Administrative power by the executive.”


– an appointed/ selected/elected body to check the activities in the interests of the citizen.
– to oversee the investigation of complaints of improper government activity against the citizen.
– doing a self check with “no conflict of interest” by administration/ government
(UNBIASED Investigation for the benefit of the citizen)

This has been institutionalised first in 1809 in Sweden and so in many countries so far. Most of well known countries have an established ombudsman in some form.  However, India as of now stands with few of countries in world who doesn’t have well established Ombudsman machinery in place and in practice.

It has been well in debate in India for quite long time. In 1964 CVC (Chief Vigilance Commission) came into practice. However in 1966 under Morarji Desai, a committee was established to set up Ombudsman as in Lokpal or Lokayukta. Which recommended Loayukta at two level – One Lopkap at Center and Lokaukyta at state level. At that proposal judicial was not under its jurisdiction. Since 1965 till 2005 many times lokpal Bill were presented in parliament but it has never been approved as a law.
As of now some states though have established Lokaukta.

Key features of Government drafted bill which are in debate

>Current proposed bill binds the Lokayukta to bring Vigil on PM, Judicial and MP.
– Who is left? – Government Official or THE CHOOSEN ONE that needs to be kept on mercy or bali ka bakra

> It also disconnects the joint between citizen and Lokauykta. Means it becomes an another machinery for the people holding the influential posts
– Defying the Conflict of interest point and sole purpose of OmbudsMAN  / LOKAyukta

>Lokaukta can only take cases which has been approved by Speaker of Lok Sabha or Chariman of Rajya Sabha .
-This moreover gives control to government and, since we know “MP” and that it has to be approved by “Speaker of Parliament”, Obviously it will go over debates and round of walkouts in parliaments with politics between government and opposition

This will retain the very essence of Corruption, either we eat all or let me ea or I will open your books.

> LokAukta can investigate and be an advisory board to submit the report back to Parliament or some Authority

Doesn’t we already have this in practice when parliament/ government sets up a joint commission or a commission – normally with a retired judge to investigate and submit reports.
So, Why we need another formalised which has a name of Ombudsman but handicapped or a slave body of elected MPs?

> Lokayukta will also not have any Police powers, which means it has to depend back on other body which is directly influenced by Politicians.

So what’s the purpose and benefit of bringing an another ordinance which has no mean, no power, no fear – What will guarantee it to be free of politics and power games.

> Punishment for corruption will be a minimum of 6 months and a maximum of up to 7 years.
All recently charge sheeted MPs can be PM in another Seven Years.

I haven’t read completely the 28 page 1.8 version of jan lokpal bil completely and neither the detailed proposed bill, but what I  understood is that proposed bill has tried to define complete definition of processes, guidelines, roles including information availability.
But the question is its Objectivity and intention? Who is under the purview of this body that can be investigated and if so, can it definitely lead to punishment, if proven guilty. Will this proposed bill brings any difference to the existing system?  Will this bill be able to catch those who misuse the authority and power to the maximum?  What’s the intent of government to bring this bill? What belief a common Man would have on such a law? What could achieve in real terms?

Jan Lokpal Bill has some 22 points of which they differ from proposed Government’s bill

I would request that at least to know what it is and have your opinion rather than just following the mob that seems to us to be on correct path. It is for us and we should know it.

It is right that Corruption is deep rooted in our Indian System. Everyone has its own say when he sees other helpless and also as a citizen where we see the opportunity to jump on other’s right for self benefit. And crib on others when being victimised of the system.
Rightly said corruption isn’t limited to Money only, it is there in everywhere and in everyform.

I think it prevails when there is no fear even if we have all forms of faiths and God to bring fear to maintain social decorum.

And it will lead to anarchy if it doesn’t get controlled or it continuously to be misused. Yes !People on top with more Power are more responsible to bring it in order first by assessing that layer and if top get controlled fear and discipline certainly seep down…

And we know which level gets the biggest loot of lottery.

I will not say that I will stop paying bribe or refuse to pay extra to auto walla and to go fight with school fellow for my cook to get his complete salary and on time. But if with correct intention correct law brings fear and control, may be over long period of time I (or next generation) might don’t have to be part of current level of corruption .

Source :
Jan Lokpal Bill – Activists version (v 1.8 ) –

Government of India – ProposedLokpal Bill –

Under Consideration  (v 2.3) –
[*check personal Yahoo email id in footer o a Government of India proposed ordinance?]

wiki links

Some Views:-

Hello world!

Myself, Ashish