The parliamentary standing committee on law ministry on Sunday decided to further scrutinise some sections of the Anti-Corruption Commission (Amendment) Bill 2011 before finalising it.
At a meeting of the committee, most of its members and the finance minister opposed a proposed provision of the bill that stipulates that permission should be obtained from the government for filing corruption charges against a judge, magistrate or public servant, meeting sources said.
The minister in-charge of cabinet division in parliamentary business, Matia Chowdhury, who was present at the meeting, suggested that the committee should finalise a balanced law, prompting the committee to further examine the bill, meeting sources said.
The bill proposes insertion of a new Section 32A that says the provisions in Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must be followed in filing a graft case against a judge, magistrate or public servant.
'I advised the committee to finalise it considering our reality,' Matia told New Age, adding that she had suggested a balanced law. The finance minister, AMA Muhith, told the meeting that the new provision should be dropped.
'We want to examine the bill closely and a team will be sent abroad to gather experience, if necessary,' committee chairman Suranjit Sengupta told reporters after the meeting.
He also said that most of the committee members and the finance minister had opposed the new provision and the agriculture minister called for finalising the bill considering the reality to make it effective and acceptable.
On May 19, the committee raised questions about some sections and called for bringing changes to the Anti-Corruption Commission (amendment) Bill 2011 which was placed in the house on February 28 and sent to the committee for scrutiny.
The committee members observed that although the proposed law would enable the bureaucracy to act independently for the state, individual corruption by government officials could increase.
They suggested that in case of personal corruption, the commission should have power to file cases without government permission, committee sources said.
Earlier, Muhith wrote to the committee proposing that the provision that makes it mandatory to take government's permission for filing corruption cases against government officials should be dropped.
He also opposed the proposal for stripping the ACC of the authority to appoint its own secretary.
Section 197 of the CrPC says, 'When a person who is a judge within the meaning of section 19 of the Penal Code, or when a magistrate, or when any public servant who is not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the government, is accused of an offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty, no court shall take cognisance of such offence except with the previous sanction of the government.'
The act, however, does not have any definition of 'public servant'.
Article 152 of the constitution defines 'public officer' as 'a person holding or acting in any office of emolument in the service of the republic'. The Bengali version of the article makes the same definition for 'public servant' (sarkari karmachari).
The term 'public servant' is, however, defined in the Penal Code.
The bill proposes empowerment of the government to appoint a secretary to the commission.
If the bill is enacted, the commission will have no power to summon witnesses or to record their depositions on oath.
Source : New Age
