LegislationLok Pal Bill: The Standing Committee's ViewsKaushiki- December 18, 2011There areindicationsthat the Lok Pal Bill, 2011 is likely to be taken up for consideration and passing during the current Winter session of Parliament.  TheBillwas introduced on Aug 4, 2011 in the Lok Sabha after a prolonged agitation led by Anna Hazare (seePRS analysisof the Bill).  It was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice (seePRS note on Committee Systems).  The Committee submitted itsreporton December 9, 2011.  The report includes 10 dissent notes from 17 MPs. (a)    Kirti Azad, Bal Apte, D.B. Chandre Gowda, Harin Pathak, Arjun Ram Meghwal, and Madhusudan Yadav. (b)   Ram Jethmalani (c)    Ram Vilas Paswan (d)   Shailendra Kumar (e)    Prasanta Kumar Majumdar (f)     Pinaki Misra (g)    A. Sampath (h)    S. Semmalai (i)      Meenakshi Natrajan, P.T. Thomas, and Deepa Dasmunshi (j)     Vijay Bahadur Singh Presently, the government and the Opposition are in the process of formulating their stands on various key issues such as inclusion of the Prime Minister, the lower bureaucracy and the role of the Central Investigation Bureau.  We provide a broad overview of the views of the members of the Committee on various key issues.Unanimity on issuesOn some issues, there was unanimity among the Committee members:Constitutional status for Lokpal.Immunity from prosecution for the MPs for any vote and speech in the HouseExclusion of judiciary from the ambit of the Lokpal.Qualification of chairperson and Lok Pal members.Selection process of Lok Pal members.Lokpal should not have the powers to tap phones.Dissent on issuesCertain members of the Committee dissented on specific issues.  In Table 1, we list the issues and the reason for the dissent.Table 1: Recommendation of Standing Committee and dissent by individual MPsIssuesStanding Committee recommendationsPoints of dissentDissenting MPsInclusion of Prime MinisterCommittee left the decision to Parliament stating that there are pros and cons to each view.-     PM should be included.  -     PM should be brought under the Lok Pal with some exceptions for national security, foreign policy, atomic energy etc. -     The decision to investigate or prosecute the PM should be taken by the Lok Pal with 3/4th majority.-  Prasanta Kumar Majumdar, A. Sampath.  -  Kirti Azad etc, Shailendra Kumar, Pinaki Misra.Grievance redressal mechanismEnact separate law for a grievance redressal mechanism.Include in the Lok Pal Bill.Kirti Azad etc, Ram Jethmalani, Shailendra Kumar.Inclusion of bureaucracyInclude Group B officers in addition to Group A.-     Include all groups of govt employees.  -     Include Group ‘C’. -     Do not include bureaucrats.-     Kirti Azad etc, A. Sampath.  -     Meenakshi Natrajan etc, Shailendra Kumar, Prasanta Kumar. Majumdar, Pinaki Misra, Vijay Bahadur Singh. -     Ram Vilas Paswan.LokayuktaSingle, central law to deal with Lok Pal and state Lokayuktas to ensure uniformity in prosecution of public servants.States should retain power to constitute Lokayuktas.-     S. Semmalai.Private NGOs, media and corporateInclude all entities with specified level of govt control or which receive specified amount of public donations or foreign donations above Rs 10 lakh.No private organsiations should be included.- Kirti Azad etc., Ram Vilas Paswan.Composition of search and selection committeesSelection Committee:In addition to PM and Speaker, it should include the Chief Justice of India, an eminent Indian unanimously nominated by the CAG, CEC and UPSC chairman and only Leader of Opposition of Lok Sabha.Search Committee:Mandatory to constitute. Minimum 7 members with 50% members from SC/ST, OBC, minorities and women.Selection Committee:PM, Minister, LoPs of both Houses, two judges and CVC.Search Committee:CJI, CAG, CEC, Cabinet Secretary, judges of Supreme Court and High Courts.Selection Committee:PM, LoP in the Lok Sabha, one judge of SC and one Chief Justice of a HC, CVC, CEC and CAG.Search Committee:10 members out of which 5 should be from civil society and 5 should be retired Chief Justice, CVC, CAG and CEC.  Half the members to be from SC/STs, OBCs, minorities or women.-  Kirti Azad etc.  -  Shailendra Kumar.Removal of Lok PalIn addition to petitioning the President, a citizen should be allowed to approach the Supreme Court directly with a complaint.  If admitted, it would be heard by a 5 judge bench.  If President does not refer a citizen’s petition, he should give reasons.Investigation should be conducted by an independent complaint authority.  Heavy fines should be imposed in case of a false or frivolous complaint. Instead of the President, the Supreme Court should have power to suspend a member pending inquiry.- Shailendra Kumar.Role of CVC and CBICVC should investigate Group C and D employees.  Instead of Lok Pal’s investigation wing, the CBI should investigate cases after inquiry by the Lok Pal.  CBI to have autonomy over its investigation.  Lok Pal shall exercise general supervision over CBI.CBI should be under the control of the Lok Pal.  The CBI Director should be appointed by the Lok Pal’s selection committee. The CVC should be under Lok Pal and the SVCs under the state Lokayuktas.-  Ram Jethmalani, Shailendra Kumar.  -  A. Sampath. -  Meenakshi Natrajan etc.False and frivolous complaintsTerm of imprisonment should be maximum six months.  Amount of fine should not exceed Rs 25,000.  Specifically provide for complaints made in good faith in line with the Indian Penal Code.The term of imprisonment should not exceed 30 days.- Kirti Azad etc.Article 311Article 311 of the Constitution should be amended or replaced with a statute.The procedure adopted by the disciplinary authority should conform to Article 311.- Kirti Azad etc, Meenakshi Natrajan etc.FinanceLok Pal Bill states that all expenses of the Lok Pal shall be charged to the Consolidated Fund of India (no need for Lok Sabha clearance).  The Committee did not make any recommendation with regard to finances of the Lok Pal.Lok Pal’s expenses should be cleared by the Parliament.  Lok Pal should present its budget directly to Parliament rather than through a ministry.-  Kirti Azad etc.  -  Shailendra Kumar.Sources: The Lok Pal Bill, 2011; the Department Related Standing Committee Report on the Lok Pal Bill, 2011 and PRS.ParliamentFirst no-confidence motion of the 17th Lok Sabha discussed todayNiranjana Menon- August 8, 2023Discussion on the first no-confidence motion of the 17thLok Sabha began today.  No-confidence motions and confidence motions are trust votes, used to test or demonstrate the support of Lok Sabha for the government in power.  Article 75(3) of the Constitution states that the government is collectively responsible to Lok Sabha.  This means that the government must always enjoy the support of a majority of the members of Lok Sabha.  Trust votes are used to examine this support.  The government resigns if a majority of members support a no-confidence motion, or reject a confidence motion.So far, 28 no-confidence motions (including the one being discussed today) and 11 confidence motions have beendiscussed.  Over the years, the number of such motions has reduced.  The mid-1960s and mid-1970s saw more no-confidence motions, whereas the 1990s saw more confidence motions.Figure1: Trust votes in ParliamentNote: *Term shorter than 5 years; **6-year term.Source: Statistical Handbook 2021, Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs; PRS.The no-confidence motion being discussed today wasmovedon July 26, 2023.  A motion of no-confidence is moved with the support of at least 50 members.   The Speaker has the discretion to allot time for discussion of the motion.  TheRules of Procedurestate that the motion must be discussed within 10 days of being introduced.  This year, the no-confidence motion wasdiscussed13 calendar days after introduction.  Since the introduction of the no-confidence motion on July 26, 12 Bills have been introduced and 18 Bills have been passed by Lok Sabha.  In the past, on four occasions, the discussion on no-confidence motions began seven days after their introduction.  On these occasions, Bills and other important issues were debated before the discussion on the no-confidence motion began.Figure2: Members rise in support of the motion of no-confidence in Lok SabhaSource: Sansad TV, Lok Sabha, July 26, 2023; PRS.Figure3: Number of days from introduction to discussion on no-confidence motionsNote: Number of days implies calendar days.Source: Statistical Handbook 2021, Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs; PRS.On average, no-confidence motions (excluding the one being discussed today) have been discussed for 13 hours over three days.  Discussions have lasted longer than 20 hours on four instances, most recently in 2003.  Today’s no-confidence motion was allotted 12 hours discussion time by theBusiness Advisory Committee.Following the discussion, the motion is put to vote.  26 out of 27 no-confidence motions (excluding the one being discussed today) have been voted upon and rejected.  This means that no government has ever had to resign following a vote of no-confidence.   On one occasion, in 1979, the discussion on a no-confidence motion against the Morarji Desai government remained inconclusive.  He resigned before the motion was put to vote.  50% of all no-confidence motions (14 out of 28) were discussed between 1965 and 1975.  Of these, 12 were against governments headed by Indira Gandhi.Figure4: Duration of discussion on no-confidence motionsNote: This graph excludes the no confidence motion moved on July 26, 2023.Source: Statistical Handbook 2021, Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs; PRS.In comparison, confidence motions have a more varied history.  The first motion, brought in 1979 to demonstrate confidence in Charan Singh’s government, was not discussed at all.  The Prime Minister resigned before the discussion could take place.  Since then, 11 confidence motions have been discussed in Lok Sabha, with nine occurring in the 1990s.  During this period, several coalition governments were formed, and Prime Ministers sought to prove their majority throughconfidence motions.   These motions have been discussed, on average, for 12 hours over two days.Figure5: Duration of discussion of confidence motionsSource: Statistical Handbook 2021, Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs; PRS.Of the 11 confidence motions discussed in Lok Sabha, seven were accepted.  On three instances, governments had to resign as they could not prove that they had the support of the majority.  On one instance in 1996, the motion was not put to vote.  Following an eleven-hour discussion on this confidence motion, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee announced his intention to resign on the floor of the House.  He resigned 16 days into his term.Vajpayee became Prime Minister again in 1999, and faced another confidence motion.   This time, it was put to vote.   The motion was defeated by a margin of one vote.  This has been the closest result on a trust vote in the history of Lok Sabha.  The next closest result was when a motion of no-confidence against P V Narasimha Rao’s government was defeated by 14 votes in 1993.  In most cases, results have been in favour of the government by a large margin.«12345678910»