Anna Hazare, a retired soldier and a social reformer now, is the name that took almost every Indian to come out of their houses and do the dew for the country. This 74 year old led the fight or rather a Gandhian Fight to make the Govt. take steps against the Corruption going on in the country.
Today, if we look at our own lives, the corruption is a part and parcel of it. To get a job, to get a way by loading the Traffic Officer, even to buy a LPG cylinder we give the Bribe. Indeed, LOKPAL BILL is not going to heal every injury to our system, but it is a step forward none the less.
On 5 April, 2011, Anna started or rather took a step on a national level and did the fast asking the Govt. to pass the bill. His Civil Society made a draft for the bill as well, and must say, if the Govt. takes then initiative of passing the same Jan Lokpal Bill( making some changes if needed be) then it will be a great step forward. The first time, the Kapil Sibal and Co. entangled the Civil Society in the Standing Committees and all. But, Anna had the determination to take the Govt. one on one.
On 16 August, 2011 the Govt. again came under the hammer when Anna started the fast on a higher level than the previous one. See, the followers he have, may not be aware of what they are fighting for, but they know one thing that the Lokpal Bill is good for the system and for them. The scams which came under the heading last year have made the common man frustrated as the money looted belongs to the exchequer.
Now, the debate going on is JAN LOKPAL BILL vs GOVT. LOKPAL BILL. If I speak in an unbiased manner then the Anna's Bill is somewhere down the line impractical whereas the Govts' bill is seen as a assistance to Corruption. The main points of dispute were, rather are:
1. Keeping the PM out of the Lokpal. This is the hottest topic of the debate. Keeping the PM out of the bill will be a relief to the PM Office, as some key decisions for the future of the country are made there. If the PM is included in the Lokpal, then every decision of his and his office could come under the hammer, as there will always be a few who will disagree the decisions of his. And in case of the key decisions such as war and emergencies, the panic will only get a hype if some one raises his/her voice against the decision. I accept, PM has himself agreed to get himself in the Jurisdiction of the bill, but, I think, If I were the PM I would have done the same.
2. In the Govt.s' Bill, there is a provision of punishment for the person who falsely admits a complaint. A two to five is imprisonment is provisioned. But in Jan Lokpal Bill, there is a fine provisioned and a warning only. So, a blend is also needed in this regard, as anyone who raises a false complaint can not be just let off.
3. On the issue of judiciary being kept out of the Lokpal, the Govt. has an opinion of keeping it out of the purview of the Bill. They have a point of keeping it in Judicial Accountability Bill (JAB), and if a complaint is registered against a Judge then a three member committee (two judges from the same court and a retired Chief Justice of the same court). Don't know what the Govt. thought before making such a peculiar point that the inquiry will be done by the judge's staff members.
4. The point which I think the common man will welcome the most is the 'Citizen Charter'. Under this, if there an officer doesn't do citizen's work in a prescribed time, then he/she should be penalized. The Govt. thinks different on this point and have a thought of no penalization. An interesting thing on this point is that the Govt. first agreed to this demand of the Civil Society on 23 May, 2011 and then they refused to accept it afterwards.
5. According to the Govt. the CBI should remain in its hold and the Civil Society want its Anti-corruption unit to be under Lokpal. The CBI being under the Govt. questions the unbiased nature of the same.
Recently, the Govt. accepted the demand to pass the bill in the Parliament and the three points on which the consensus was not happening. And, on 27 August, 2011 the three points raised by the Civil Society were accepted by the Govt. and the opposition by Voice Voting. This is seen as a success for Anna & Co. But, the language of the issued notice of the Govt, to the Standing Committee is an issue to be seen. The Govt. used the wording that they will recommend the Standing Committee to 'SERIOUSLY CONSIDER' the three points. What this mean?
Well, must say, this is a historic event that defined the meaning of Democracy appropriately. Democracy doesn't mean electing a leader and then the leader doesn't look after his people for the next five year. A Leader is a representative of his people who have elected him. And if his electors want something to happen, this is his duty to consider their demands. Anna has given the Common Man of this country a believe that they have elected the leaders and they have the power to oppose their doings and make them hear their demands.
The people who supported Anna Hazare wore an old fashioned cap and there was a line written on those caps, 'I AM ANNA'! This means a lot. It assures the 74 year old reformer that he is not alone fighting for the sake of 'their' country, but they all support him.
I say with pride, I SUPPORT ANNA HAZARE!