WHAT IS CORRUPTION IN POLITICS

Political corruption is the exercise of authorized authority for illegal personal gain by a public
official.

Bribery, extortion (fraud), cronyism (appointing friends and acquaintances to positions of

authority without considering their qualifications), patronage, embezzlement (theft), and graft are
some of the manifestations of corruption (gains secured due to corrupt practices).

Even though there are numerous reasons for corruption, several studies and surveys have been
conducted according to surveys, the following are the primary reasons for most governments
and societies.

 Lack of laws, regulations, accountability, and transparency in the public sector.

 Absence of supervision, control, and auditing.
 The absence of a clearly defined code of conduct for politicians and public officials.
 Attitudes or situations that encourage the general public to flout the law.
 The evolution of people's ethical standards and value systems. Ethics and morals
deteriorate, and the majority of people now place more value on wealth than on
brilliance.
 Bribery may offer a practical way to complete tasks or prevent any punishment.
 Bad incentives include people's tolerance for corruption and situations where employees
supplement their income with bribes since they don't make enough money to live on.
 Lack of a robust civil society or public forum to combat corruption, etc.

MORAL CORRUPTION- Morality is the key area of crisis today. People who had a reliable
source of income in their line of work supported Mahatma Gandhi's cause despite suffering
personal loss. There was only zealous evangelism. Nowadays, very few people who are at least
moderately successful in their careers would like to leave those careers and enter politics and
public life.

As a result, all political parties are burdened with individuals for whom politics is their primary
source of income.

CASE STUDIES

 Lakshman Savdi and C. C. Patil, two BJP ministers in Karnataka, are accused of being
seen viewing pornographic videos on the former's mobile phone on the floor of the state
legislative house. Even as the house was having a contentious discussion about the
recent raising of the Pakistani flag in Sindagi in the Bijapur district, the ministers were
caught in the act.
 Rajshekhar Mulali, an RTI activist, asserted that he had a CD with footage of suspected
indecent acts by H Y Meti with ladies who asked him for help. Additionally, the activist
said that some Meti followers had threatened him because of the CD, which had not
been made public until the minister left. However, an audio recording of the supposed
sex CD had come to light, in which a man who identified himself as a Meti follower was
 heard threatening the RTI activist. Meti met with Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and
presented his resignation as the situation grew and the opposition called for his removal.

Legal Corruption: Operation West End

The terrifying account of the demise of India's only sacred cow is told in Operation West End:
establishment of defense.

In August of 2000, the Tehelka Investigation Team—or, more precisely, Aniruddha Bahal and
his assistant Mathew Samuel—launched their undercover operation into defense acquisitions.
When Matthew Samuel was on his way back to Mumbai from Pune on the Deccan Queen, a
casual conversation with a fellow passenger—who turned out to be a supplier to army canteens
—led him to arrange the West End sting operation for the portal, Tehelka, where he was then a
special correspondent. Bahal and Samuel set out to sell fictional hand-held thermal cameras
under the guise of a phony corporation called West End. They shot almost a hundred hours of
footage with spy cameras over seven months.

At the pinnacle, BJP President Bangaru Laxman was elected party president of the BJP in
August 2000. The BJP portrayed him as the party's new national face, a Dalit and a South
Indian who accepted a Rs 1 lakh token bribe to help the West End's chances. He waited
impatiently for another $30,000 in a revealing encounter, but it never arrived.

Then there was Jaya Jaitly, President of the Samata Party, and a close aide of Defense Minister
George Fernandes (who was forced to leave as Defense Minister), who received a bribe of Rs.
2 lakhs. In reality, the Tehelka Investigation gives the Samata party little ground to stand on, as
its treasurer airs all of his party's shady dealings with great delight and glee.

Unfortunately, the army also buried itself in shame after a spate of generals were caught
scrounging for payoffs.

In comparison, the West End tapes are a literal goldmine for any law enforcement organization
with a mission. It took several weeks and a huge team of great professionals to turn the story
into a four-and-a-half-page documentary. The goal of Operation West End was not to entertain
or engross but to expose the truth.

Financial corruption: government bodies pocketing money

Rs.350 crore Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) road scam

Snehal Ambekar, the mayor of Mumbai, has written to BMC chairman Ajay Mehta, protesting
about the poor quality of the city's freshly constructed roadways. Following concerns about poor
and unsatisfactory road maintenance and construction quality, the BMC launched an
investigation into the road work done last year. The overall amount of work under review is
estimated to be around Rs. 2500 crore.

The corporation chose 34 roads as case studies in the first phase of the investigation, while the
remaining 200 were saved for the second phase. The first and second reports have different
formats. To guarantee that the investigation protocol is followed, when asked how long it will
take (for the modified report to be filed), the commissioner responded that no date has been set.
During the first inquiry, Additional Municipal Commissioner Sanjay Deshmukh, who oversaw the
probe into checking for abnormalities in road work, noted that the quality of roads was
significantly below requirements, with damage ranging between 20% and 80%. On April 27th,
the BMC filed an FIR.

at the Azad Maidan police station. To investigate the crime, a Special Investigation Team (SIT)
was created, led by Assistant Commissioner of Police (Colaba Division) Rajendra Chavan and
DCP Manoj Sharma.

The corporation cited six contractors in its complaint: RPS Infra, KR Construction, J Kumar,
Relcom Infra projects, RK Madhani, and Mahavir Infrastructure, as well as two third-party
auditors, SGC Consultants, and IRS. So far, 25 engineers have been arrested in connection
with the scheme (3 from BMC and 22 from contractors or auditors). A case has been filed under
sections 420, 120 B, and 197 of the IPC.

 Two BMC chief engineers, Ashok Pawar (roads) and Uday Murudkar (vigilance) were
detained for failing to monitor the job adequately.
 Kishore Yerme, another executive engineer, was detained in July.
 Except for the BMC engineers, everyone else detained is out on bond.

Financial corruption, for example,

The CBI has arrested a BJP councilor in Delhi in connection with a bribery case worth Rs 10
lakh. Manoj Mehlawat, a Vasant Kunj councilor, allegedly sought a bribe to allow the
construction of a house to proceed without delay. Mehlawat was brought before a special court,
which sentenced him to judicial detention. After setting a trap, the agency captured him red-
handed.

Steps were taken by BMC:

As a result, the firm has taken steps to close the gap with citizens in two ways: first, by
improving processes and procedures using information technology to reduce the need for
citizens to approach the corporation for their regular needs (issues of certificates, payment of
taxes, etc.); and second, by changing the systems to make local BMC officials directly
responsible for the quality of civic works in their jurisdiction. – NIKKI.

REMEDIES TO REDUCE CORRUPTION IN POLITICS

The Right to Information Act (RTI Act) is a progressive piece of legislation built on the basic
access guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. The goals of the act are to hold the executive
accountable and guarantee that the schemes and politics will be implemented transparently. It
became effective on 12th October 2005(120 days after the enactment on 15 June 2005). Except
for The State of Jammu and Kashmir, the act applies to entire India. The act includes the right to
inspect documents.

In every Government Department, there is a Public Information Officer (PIO) appointed, whose
duty is to collect information needed by the citizens and provide them with the information in
exchange for a small fee. The applicant may file a complaint with the relevant information
commission, which has the authority to fine the negligent PIO up to Rs 25,000 if the PIO rejects
the application or fails to provide the requested information promptly.

EXAMPLE

For the benefit of the battle widows and veterans of the Kargil conflict, the Prime Colaba,
Mumbai property that houses the 31-story Adarsh housing society was built. But the people who
ended up living in the apartment building constructed on defense territory were bureaucrats and
relatives of politicians, who had nothing to do with the Kartik conflict. The cost at which the
apartment was bought was below the market value. Oh, Simpich thing, and Aarti activist,
revealed the scam.

It was discovered that the navy had protested, expressing the security service as the planned
helipad and military base was near the Adarsh 100-meter-tall structure. It was also discovered
that the society had permission to build only six floors, and had not received a Non-Objection
Certificate (NOC) from the Ministry of Environment and forests

Ashok Chavan, the then Cm of Maharashtra, resigned as a result of the Adarsh fraud, and an
FIR was lodged against him. It was also revealed that the society was granted permission when
Mr. Chavan was the Revenue Minister. According to the information obtained, Mr. Chavan
allowed the sale of 40% of homes to civilians. The occupancy certificate was revoked by the
Mumbai metropolitan region development authority. (MMRDA) and even the water supply was
cut. As the structure of the building did not adhere to the green standards , the Bombay high
court ordered it’s demolition.

The Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act, 2009

Introduction:-

An Act to provide for setting out the regime of right to information for the people of the State to
secure access to information under the control of public authorities in order to promote
transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority, the constitution of a
State Information Commission and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

Description :-

The Jammu & Kashmir Right to Information Act, 2009 came into force on 20 March 2009, repealing and
replacing the erstwhile Jammu & Kashmir Right to Information Act, 2004 and the Jammu & Kashmir
Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2008. The Act is based closely upon the Central Right to
Information Act, 2005. Like all RTI legislation, it is intended to provided citizens a legally mandate
mechanism for obtaining government records.

Historic Context & J&K RTI Act of 2004:-

The Jammu & Kashmir Right to Information Act, 2004, was enacted on 7 January, 2004. The Rules to the
Act were issued on June 30, 2005. The enactment of this Act came within the larger context of the Right
to Information movement in India, which resulted in the passage of several state-level RTI Acts across
India, including Tamil Nadu (1997), Goa (1997), Rajasthan (2000), Karnataka (2000), Delhi (2001),
Maharashtra (2002), Madhya Pradesh (2003), Assam (2002) and Jammu and Kashmir (2004). The
movement culminated in the passage of the (Central) Right to Information Act, 2005, which was partially
intended to supersede the various state-level Acts. Furthermore, the (Central) RTI Act, 2005 enshrines
stronger provisions than those seen in the individual state-level Acts. As such, the (Central) RTI Act, 2005
applies to the Union Government of India and all of its States and Union Territories, but not to the State
of Jammu & Kashmir. Jammu & Kashmir is accorded special provisions under Article 370 of the
Constitution of India, which exempts most legislation passed in the Parliament of India from
automatically applying to the State of Jammu & Kashmir. Instead, under the Constitution of Jammu &
Kashmir, the state's own Legislative Assembly has the option of (a) voting to "extend" a Union Act to its
own state using a special legislative procedure, (b) voting to enact a state-specific law of its own using
the traditional state-level drafting process, or (c) simply ignoring the Union Act altogether.

J&K RTI Act Amendment of 2008:-

Despite several years of lobbying by citizens' groups, the Government of Jammu & Kashmir opted not to
extend the Central Right to Information Act, 2005 to J&K.Consequently, residents of J&K seeking
information from their State's Government have used the older and weaker Jammu & Kashmir Right to
Information Act, 2004. In, September 2007, the Government passed the Jammu & Kashmir Right to
Information (Amendment) Act, which was duly notified in the Jammu & Kashmir gazette in January
2008. The Amendment Act, 2008 includes for several amendments to the original 2004 act to bring it
closer in-line with the (Central) RTI Act, 2005, though it has been criticized by citizen's groups for
"watering down" its key provisions.[5] The Amendment Act, 2008 was technically "in force" but was
never implemented in spirit. The Rules to the Amendment Act were never issued, and the crucial Jammu
& Kashmir State Information Commission stipulated in the Act was (never) constituted and appointed.

J&K RTI Act 2009:-

In December 2008, the National Conference party led by Omar Abdullah announced that a new RTI Act
was among their "election manifesto" goals. The National Conference was subsequently elected to
power and Omar Abdullah became the state's Chief Minister. A draft bill was tabled on 7 March 2009,
and passed by the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council by 12 March 2009. The Act was
subsequently gazetted (and came into force) on 20 March 2009. The Rules to the Act were gazetted on 6
June 2009. The Government is presently in the process of appointing PIOs and APIOs. The J&K State
Information Commission has not yet been appointed.
What is the Lokpal Bill?

 Though a Bill set up an anti-corruption body was put forth as many as eight times
between 1968 and 2011, the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill, 2011, stands as the base for
the Lokpal Act in its present form. A Group of Ministers chaired by Pranab Mukherjee
proposed this Bill, to which the Standing Committee made substantial modifications. The
modified Bill, called as Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill, 2013, was passed by the Parliament
with the support of all major political parties, barring the Samajwadi party, making it the
Lokpal Act of 2013.
 1963: The idea of an ombudsman first came up in parliament during a discussion on
budget allocation for the Law Ministry.
 1966: The First Administrative Reforms Commission recommended the setting up of two
independent authorities- at the central and state level, to look into complaints against
public functionaries, including MPs.
 1968: The Lokpal Bill was introduced in parliament but was not passed. Eight attempts
were made till 2011 to pass the Bill but in vain.
 2002: The Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution headed by M.N.
Venkatachiliah recommended the appointment of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas; also
recommended that the PM be kept out of the ambit of the authority.
 2005: The second Administrative Reforms Commission chaired by Veerappa Moily
recommended that the office of Lokpal be established without delay.
 2011: The government formed a Group of Ministers, chaired by Pranab Mukherjee to
suggest measures to tackle corruption and examine the proposal of a Lokpal Bill.
 2013: Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill, 2013, was passed in both Houses of Parliament.
 2016: Lok Sabha agreed to amend the Lokpal Act and Bill was sent to Standing
Committee for review.

What are the powers of Lokpal?

The Lokpal will have the power of superintendence and direction over any investigation agency
including the CBI for cases referred to them by the ombudsman.

As per the Act, the Lokpal can summon or question any public servant if there exists a prima
facie case against the person, even before an investigation agency (such as vigilance or CBI)
has begun the probe. Any officer of the CBI investigating a case referred to it by the Lokpal,
shall not be transferred without the approval of the Lokpal.

An investigation must be completed within six months. However, the Lokpal or Lokayukta may
allow extensions of six months at a time provided the reasons for the need for such extensions
are given in writing.

Special courts will be instituted to conduct trials on cases referred by Lokpal.

The Lokpal can award fines up to Rs.2 lakh for "false, frivolous or vexatious" complaints.

Who appoints the Lokpal?

A five-member panel comprising the Prime Minister, the Lok Sabha Speaker, the Leader of the
Opposition, the Chief Justice of India, and an eminent jurist nominated by the President, selects
the Lokpal.

aled that the society was granted permission when Mr. Chavan was the revenue minister.
According to the information obtained, Mr. Chavan allowed the sale of 40% of homes to
civilians. The occupancy certificate was revoked by the Mumbai metropolitan region
development authority. (MMRDA) and even the water supply was cut. As the structure of the
building did not adhere to the green standards, the Bombay high court ordered its demolition.

Lokpal (Jan Lokpal) Bill

A bill to establish an independent authority to investigate offenses under the Prevention of

Corruption Act, 1988, to detect corruption through expeditious investigation and prosecution of
offenders, to ensure timely redressal of certain types of public grievances, and to provide
whistle-blower protection.

The Bill has been passed by the Delhi Assembly, which is the state legislature of Delhi. It has
now been sent to the Centre and has been back and forth between the Delhi Government and
the Centre. The legislation will not become law until it is approved by the central government.

The lieutenant governor (LG) is an administrator in Delhi who represents the President and
consequently the national government.

A bill is delivered to the LG when it is passed in the Delhi assembly. It is subsequently sent to
the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), however, this is merely a formality. The bill is subsequently
sent back to the LG. The bill is forwarded to the departments concerned for feedback once it
has been cleared by the LG. If the LG has any suggestions, they send them back to the
assembly for revision or reconsideration. Meanwhile, certain measures are reserved for
presidential approval.

The following are the bill's main features

The proposed bill includes the following key provisions:

1. Establishment of a central government anti-corruption institute known as Lokpal, which

will be supported by Lokayukta at the state level.
2. The Lokpal, like the Supreme Court and the cabinet secretariat, will be overseen by the
cabinet secretary and the election commission. As a result, its probe will be independent
of the government and devoid of ministerial influence.
3. Members shall be appointed through a transparent and participatory procedure by
judges, Indian administrative service officers with a clean record, private persons, and
constitutional authorities.
4. A screening committee will invite shortlisted candidates for interviews, with video
recordings made public afterward.
5. The Lokayukta shall publish a list of cases dealt with, brief information on each of their
outcomes, and any action taken or planned on its website once a month. It will also
 publish a list of all cases received by the Lokayukta in the preceding month, as well as
those handled and those still outstanding.
6. A six-month investigation must be finished. However, the Lokpal or Lokayukta may grant
six-month extensions at a time if the reasons for such extensions are stated in writing.
Any subsequent trials should be completed within the next two years, for a total
procedure duration of two years.
7. Losses incurred by corrupt individuals will be recovered at the time of conviction.
8. Failure to do government office work requested by citizens within a certain time frame
would result in Lokpal imposing financial penalties on individuals guilty, which will then
be used to compensate the complainant.
9. Any complaint filed against a Lokpal officer will be investigated and resolved within a
month, and if found to be serious, the officer will be fired within two months.
10. The existing anti-corruption agencies (CVC, departmental vigilance, and the CBI's anti-
corruption unit) would be integrated into Lokpal, which will have complete power and
jurisdiction to investigate and convict any official, judge, or politician.
11. Whistleblowers who warn the agency of suspected corruption instances will also be
protected.

Role of Anna Hazare

Social activist and leader of the anti-corruption squad Anna Hazare spearheaded campaigns for
official corruption inquiry and retribution, enhanced government transparency, and rural
development. On April 5, Anna Hazare began an indefinite hunger strike to protest the Indian
government is under pressure to pass a strict anti-corruption bill. However, the Lokpal and
Lokayukta Act was passed by the government as a watered-down version of the original Lokpal
law.

Lokpal and Lokayukta Act

The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013, aims to establish Lokpal for the Union and Lokayukta for
States to investigate claims of corruption against specific public officials. Both for functionaries
and associated issues. The Act applies to all public employees both inside and outside of India,
including Jammu & Kashmir.

Powers of Lokpal

 It has the authority to direct and supervise the CBI. If it has forwarded a case to the CBI,
the investigating officer, in that case, cannot be changed without Lokpal's consent, who
also has the authority to give the CBI permission to conduct searches and seizures
related to that case.
 The inquiry division of the Lokpal has been given civil court authority.
 In exceptional cases, Lokpal has the authority to confiscate assets, proceeds, receipts,
and benefits obtained through corruption. • Lokpal has the authority to recommend the
transfer or suspension of public employees with the corruption charge.
 During the preliminary investigation, the Lokpal has the authority to issue directives to
prevent the destruction of records.
  On Lokpal's recommendation, the Central Government shall establish cases brought
under the Lokpal Act or the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which are heard and
decided by special courts. Every trial in such courts must be concluded within a year of
the case being filed with the court.

Ola Scooter Fraud

More than 1000's people were duped by a gang. The cybercrime team of Delhi Police has
caught around 20 people linked to this fraud situated in Bengaluru, Gurugram, and Bihar. The
police also raided a call center located in Patna. Approximately 60 mobiles, 114 SIM cards, 7
laptops, and 25 bank accounts with transactions worth ₹5crores have been seized since 18th
November.

What is the Scam?

On interrogation with police, two people in Bengaluru designed a fake website like Ola's. The
websites asked users for their details which were shared with the fraudsters. The fraudsters
called the potential buyers and asked them to pay 60000 – 70000 RS in the name of insurance,
down payment, or transportation charges for the vehicle.

On 26th September one user tried purchasing the scooter through OLA's app, but due to a lack
of financing options, he did not. The next day he receives a call from a person pretending to be
a salesperson from OLA and he advises the person to purchase from the fake website. The
buyer paid ₹499 as booking fees. On receiving a booking confirmation, he paid ₹30000 to the
fraudsters via a link received by them and the rest by Emi. Additionally, he was asked to pay
₹13000 delivery charges for scooters that were never received by him.

Theranos Scandal

A Stanford University dropout, Elizabeth Holmes in 2014 claimed that her company Theranos
could bring a revolutionary change in the diagnosis of a disease. The company claimed that just
one drop of blood could perform more than 100 tests. The first instrument manufactured by
them which was never available to the public was called the Edison. Edison was never able to
perform tests accurately. While their trials, the company used Siemens machines in their labs to
claim Edison gave out the result. Recently, Elizabeth Holmes, the so-called next Steve Jobs is
sentenced to 11 years of prison on 18th November. There is a famous web series the Dropout
on the entire fraud.

Illegal mining fraud in Karnataka

The fraud involved major irregularities involving mines in Bellary, including those of Obulapuram
mining company owned by G. Karunakara Reddy and G. Janardhana Reddy who was illegally
supported by the Chief Minister BS Yeddyurappa and this fraud was exposed by Lokayukta. A
report published by Lokayukta revealed major violations and systematic corruption in mining in
Bellary, including in allowed geography, the encroachment of forest land, massive
underpayments of state mining royalties relative to the market price of iron ore, and systematic
starvation of government mining entities.
The Union cabinet in 2016 approved a new amendment that has provision for classifying
corruption as a heinous crime and longer prison terms for both, bribe giver and taker.

The proposed amendment act will also ensure speedy trial limited to two-person on charges of
corruption.

The measures include penal provision being enhanced from a minimum of 6 months to 3 years
and a maximum of 5 – 7 years. Non-monetary gratification will also be covered within the
definition of the word gratification.

Nota

None of the above termed as NOTA is into function since November 2013 assembly elections. It
means against all or scratch vote. This ballot option is designed for a candidate who finds no
interest in any of the candidates.

This was introduced by the Supreme court of India keeping in mind of cleansing the political
system. Before the introduction of NOTA, a candidate had to inform the presiding officer at the
polling booth. 2019 Gujrat assembly elections, more than 5.5 lakh or 1.8% of voters had
pressed the NOTA button.

The candidates securing lesser votes than NOTA would not be eligible to file nominations for
fresh polls to be held later.

If a contesting candidate and the NOTA both receive equal valid votes, the candidate shall be
declared elected.