Gujarat's law unto itself
- All attempts being made to free soldier in Pakistan captivity: Rajnath Singh
- SC cancels Mohammad Shahabuddin's bail, orders police to take him into custody
- Congress and I stand by PM Narendra Modi: Rahul Gandhi on surgical strikes
- Bihar liquor ban: Patna HC strikes down govt's prohibition law, terms it 'illegal'
- LIVE: PM Modi calls second Cabinet Committee on Security meet
If the Gujarat Lokayukta Aayog Bill becomes law, it will reduce the lokayukta's independence and create inequalities among states
With the Lokpal bill meeting the fate of the women's reservation bill, the lokayukta remains, in many states of the Indian Union, the only ombudsman in charge of fighting corruption among the politicians and the functionaries. But this most useful institution remains fragile, as its trajectory in Gujarat testifies.
The Gujarat Lokayukta Act introduced it in the state in 1986 (15 years after Maharashtra, which played a pioneering role in that domain). According to this act, the lokayukta is appointed by the governor after consulting the chief justice of the state high court. The first lokayukta of Gujarat, S.M. Soni, resigned in 2003. Three years later, in 2006, the chief justice of the Gujarat High Court approved the candidature of Justice K.R. Vyas, whose name had been suggested by the government of Gujarat. The year after, Justice Vyas was appointed chairman of the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission. In September 2009, the governor of Gujarat returned the file recommending the appointment of Justice Vyas as lokayukta, claiming that the man was not available for the job. In November 2009, Kamla Beniwal took charge as the new governor and soon asked the chief justice to put together a panel of personalities qualified for selecting the names of people who could become lokayukta.
The Gujarat government went to the court, claiming that the governor could not take any initiative in this matter, but only follow the recommendations of the council of ministers. The court agreed and Narendra Modi, therefore, in February 2010, asked the chief justice to suggest four names. Among them, the council of ministers supported the name of Justice J.R. Vora. Opponents of the chief minister objected that Vora had been preferred because, as a member of a division bench of the Gujarat High Court, he had upheld the verdict of the Vadodara fast-track court acquitting all the accused involved in the Best Bakery case of 2002 — many of whom were to be sentenced to years of jail after the Supreme Court transferred the case to Mumbai.
- The emergence of Akhilesh Yadav as a popular leader is an indicator of the same-old in the SP
- Poverty caused by expenditure on health has doubled in India in the past 15 years
- India’s aggressive response to Nawaz Sharif’s lies at the UN was a clear indicator of the things to come
- Let’s not allow debate about what it means to be Indian to be held hostage to jingoists and bigots
- People, policymakers can be led by subtly influencing their choice architecture
- Edit - Defining moment