The suggestion made by former Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, Justice (retd) Ferdino Rebello, that the post of Lokayukta Goa can be clubbed with another position, possibly that of the Human Rights Commissioner, should be taken into consideration by the State government, that is currently in the process of selecting a Lokayukta for the State. Such a clubbing together of two positions would perhaps be the best solution to the pending appointment of a Lokayukta.
The State has remained without a Lokayukta for far too long, since October 2013, when Justice (retd) B S Reddy resigned after just seven months in the position. Since then the government has not been able to find another retired judge to serve as Lokayukta in the State. Under the Goa Lokayukta Act, the position can be filled only by a person who has been a Supreme Court judge or Chief Justice of a High Court. This reduces the field for selection quite a bit, and therefore getting the person appointed to one post to also serve on another post makes perfect sense. Former Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar had even pointed this out and spoken of amending the Goa Lokayukta Act to widen the field of eligible persons.
Justice (retd) Reddy who held the post of Lokayukta in Goa had 16 cases filed before him in the seven months that he officiated in that position. Many of the cases that were filed before him pertained to illegal mining – cases emanating from the Justice Shah Commission report findings – and had been forwarded to the Lokayukta by the government itself. Some other cases that had been filed before the Lokayukta had been disposed off after preliminary inquiries. The paltry number of cases filed and the quick resolution of some of them lead to the question whether in a State the size of Goa there is enough work for a commission such as the Human Rights and a body such as a Lokayukta to merit independent officials to head them. If the answer to this question is no, then having the same head for these two bodies would not only make sense, but also be a solution to the problem of finding a qualified jurist to head the Lokayukta.
The appointment of a Lokayukta in Goa has caused much interest. The present BJP government, in its 2012 assembly election manifesto, had promised ‘zero tolerance’ to corruption and a Lokayukta within 100 days of coming to power. It won the elections riding on the anti-corruption plank, but once in government the party was unable to fulfill the promise of a Lokayukta in the promised time frame and when a Lokayukta was finally appointed, a year later than pledged, he didn’t last long in the State having resigned a few months after the appointment. Since then the institution has been without a head.
The appointment made by the government itself appeared to have been an unwilling one, coming following much pressure from civil society. There was much pressure put on the government to make the appointment with people counting down the days to the deadline the party had set itself to make the appointment. Later, after the Lokayukta resigned, the people somehow seemed to have forgotten the promise made, though technically the government had fulfilled its promise though late.
It is already over 20 months since the State has been without a Lokayukta. There is little reason for the political class to hurry up and appoint a watchdog that will keep tabs on them, unless there is pressure from civil society. While the delay in appointing a Lokayukta will not affect bureaucracy and administrative work, the mere fact that a Lokayukta exists and is watching over the deeds of the government would be some sort of a deterrent to those inclined to indulge in some manner of corruption. As the government gets ready to appoint a new Lokayukta in the coming months – the appointment was expected before the onset of the monsoon – why not mull over the suggestions made by Justice (retd) Rebello? It could be the best option before the government and one that could hasten the appointment of a Lokayukta for the State.
