New Delhi:
Here are the highlights of what BJP's Arun Jaitley said during the Lokpal Bill debate in the Rajya Sabha:
- We don't want a weak and hollow law. We will oppose this with fervor. We are here today with the hope that the government's weak bill will be rejected by this House. But this House should also not leave today without delivering a strong law. So let us accept amendments suggested by other parties, if they make this law stronger. Let us show we can deliver an effective law. Parliament and politics both have great power and strength. We decide the laws of the country.
- So what we pass today has to reflect whether our law collides with history, or makes history.
- There is a sense of the House but there is also a sense of the nation. And the people are looking to us for a strong law. We are being tested - can we rise to the occasion?
- Political funding in the world's biggest democracy- there are many doubts about this.
- Legal architecture is strong. Our laws are strong. Investigative machinery and organizations are subject to government pressure. So the reforms needed are strong...can this be brought by a half-hearted legislation? And I regret to say this is a half-hearted legislation.
- Who wants a weak law, and who wants a strong one will be judged by the public. And it will not forgive whoever lets it down. This is not a test for just government or you. This is a test of every section, every party here. Your (govt) allies - they are also being tested. Are they only willing to proclaim or are they willing to strike (for a tough law)?
- Govt's politics was totally transparent. To create a smokescreen -that we are talking to civil society reps. You wanted to create a phony Lokpal and create a smokescreen that we are giving it constitutional status. You wanted to make it a toy and then say it's a constitutional authority. Country does not need this sort of Lokpal. This is what you described as a game-changer (dig at Rahul Gandhi). Game-changers are made with such phony institutions.
- Ensure that you do not impede upon the rights of governments to form their own laws. Assure us that the autonomy of the states will be protected. Federalism and anti-corruption laws can co-exist.
- Who will select the Lokpal - the government will have max clout. You have a long history of trying to control these institutions.
- Three of the five people to select Lokpal will be chosen by the government. And who will remove the members of the Lokpal? As a citizen, I don't have the right to do this. I'll have to approach the government and then the government can approach the Supreme Court. So if Lokpal is biased in favour of government, the beneficiary of that bias will decide on the future of that Lokpal. You will appoint Lokpal and you will control the removal procedure. You are creating an institution where you control appointment and removal mechanism. Change this procedure immediately and we will support you.
- In the work of the investigating agency (CBI), nobody can interfere - neither Lokpal nor government. Process of investigation is so complicated - somebody said on television it's like a "jalebi." Criminal investigations are not done by such a round-robin. Whoever created this mechanism is completely ignorant of how criminal investigations are done. Why are you creating an impossible mechanism? Even CBI says this is unworkable...Anna's colleagues say so...we are all saying it. But you have some sense of prestige that you want to create this mechanism because you have said so. This requires a serious change.
- CBI - investigation functions have to be performed independently. Appointment of CBI Director should be done with arm's length. At least spare the CBI your predisposition for control. Like you have kept the right to suspend the Lokpal, at least don't keep the right to transfer officials who may be carrying out investigations you don't approve of.
- Politicians have to be big-hearted. Your attempt to bring civil society groups, NGOs under Lokpal is a "revenge provision." These are not public servants. You want to use that Lokpal whose credibility is questionable to intrude into every aspect of life including temples, mosques, schools.
- What you are creating is a government-controlled authority that will be so intrusive that it will enter every area of private life. Don't think for a second that other members of the House will support you on this. The officer against who the Lokpal orders an investigation must be given legal aid. Why must you shed crocodile tears?
- Government has consciously brought a law which is constitutionally vulnerable.
- My utmost respect for Pranab Mukherjee is not unknown. Fortunately for us he is not a lawyer so he can't argue on both sides (Pranab laughs)
- (On clause on Lokayuktas): Please don't create an area where you are creating for the first time a precedent - a grey area where Centre may also have power, state can also have power. Portion on Lokayukta is based on incomplete reading of Constitution. Clause 81 gives Centre the power to prosecute and take action against state officials. Trinamool Congress is right - state government has right to frame law and to decide on action against state officials. Why are you creating constitutional havoc? You create a system where disciplinary action against officer of the state can take place via a central law? It can only take place on orders of state legislature. States won't be able to run their governments. You are asking states to surrender their rights to run state services. The authority to deal with state services can only be with the state.
- Does UN Convention Against Corruption tell us what will be caste and religion of Lokayukta in the states? You are citing that convention. You have created a new constitution! This is for the first time I am seeing a new constitution being created. This government is trying to make a constitutional cocktail. Get a resolution from two states, frame a proper law, make it optional for those states that want it. Do it under Article 252 - we will agree to it immediately. You have mixed Article 252 and Article 253 - this is a constitutional cocktail.
- Most of us conceptually and ideologically support affirmative action. You say reservation for Lokpal members will be "not less than 50%." But Supreme Court has cap of 50% for reservation. Your law is designed to have reservation for at least five out of nine members, so it's constitutionally unviable. It will not stand in court. All this is designed to make this law vulnerable to a constitutional challenge.
- Why should Citizen's Charter not be part of this? You agreed to this in Sense of House on August 27. For Lokayukta too, we have to do this in correct manner. We cannot encroach upon right of states and then say state has the power to reject a central law.
- Institution-building is a very challenging task. This will be primary integrity institution in this country. Are we going to subvert it even before it is formed? You want to kill the Lokpal while it is still in the womb. You want to create a subservient Lokpal. You want to make it a rudderless institution. If we create bad history, we will force next generations to correct our mistakes. We are here the whole day to pass a Lokpal Bill but not your Lokpal Bill.