"I am happy to participate in the 8th All India Conference of Lokayuktas and Uplokayuktas being organized by the All India Association of Lokayuktas in Dehradun.

The establishment of the institutions of Lokayukta and Uplokayukta is part of an ongoing effort to provide clean, transparent and accountable government to the people. Our struggle for independence too was also a struggle for good governance. Mahatma Gandhiji had understood the gathering crisis of corruption and prophesied that the public would need to be in the forefront in exposing corrupt practices and taking to task those who were involved in them. As early as 1928 Mahatma Gandhi wrote in Young India,  'Corruption will be out one day, however much one may try to conceal it; and the public can, as its right and duty, in every case of justifiable suspicion, call its servants to strict account, dismiss them, sue them in a law court or appoint an arbitrator or inspector to scrutinise their conduct, as it likes.'

Subsequently, after Independence, there were periodic proposals to create institutions for inquiring into complaints against public servants in the discharge of their duties. Lokayuktas and Uplokayuktas today are the institutional manifestations of the need to provide a quasi-judicial body, which would act as a watchdog to pinpoint wrong doings of the administration, look into complaints of the victims of corrupt elements and suggest measures to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of our Government.

As part of their responsibilities, Lokayuktas have been unearthing corruption cases, recommending measures to redress grievances of the people and above all, acting as a much needed safety valve to release the bottled up pressure of aggrieved citizens, which, if allowed to accumulate, would put a question mark on the credibility of our administrative apparatus. In many States, the work of Lokayuktas has brought to light the misdeeds of public functionaries and alerted them to discharge their responsibilities with care, sensitivity and concern for the public interest. The very existence of a Lokayukta helps to generate a feeling of assurance among the public at large, that they have a mechanism to fall back upon when faced with corrupt public servants. Such a perception is itself an important factor in an accountable, clean responsive and responsible administration.

Today, in our country there is widespread discussion on the issue of clean governance and the measures required to ensure so that the trend of corruption and maladministration is arrested and reversed. Some years back, the Human Development Report of 2002 on the theme 'Deepening Democracy in a Fragmented World' had stated that good governance and the establishment of an Ombudsman are important steps to make democracy effective and meaningful for the lives of the ordinary people.

In the National Common Minimum Programme of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) Government, we are committed to the people to give a stable, honest, transparent and efficient Government capable of accomplishing all round development. It is commonly accepted that one of the major causes of corruption is lack of transparency in public life. We are, therefore, committed to the implementation of the Freedom of Information Act. We will also accelerate measures to improve the quality of public service through the introduction of Citizens' Charters, facilitation counters in Central Ministries and Departments and simplification of rules and procedures of doing business.

In addition, we also have the mandate given by the Common Minimum Programme to enact the Lok Pal Bill which, over past three decades has been introduced from time to time in Parliament, I believe eight times, but unfortunately could not enter our statute books. I have no hesitation in saying - and even confessing - that the absence of an institution such as the Lok Pal at the Centre is to some extent negatively affecting the working of the Lokayukta institutions at the state level. The need for Lok Pal is, therefore, much more urgent at present than ever before and we shall take effective action in this regard without any further loss of time.

Discussions and deliberations in the past on the subject, both inside and outside Parliament have thrown up important questions, both as regards the composition of the institution and as regards its powers. The current consensus is by and large in favour of a multi-member institution, with quasi-judicial powers. There is also a broad agreement that public functionaries, directly or indirectly elected by and responsible to the public such as Members of Parliament and Ministers, including the Prime Minister, should be brought within the purview of the Lok Pal legislation.

In this context, let me suggest a few measures to further raise its stature and standing and ensure greater effectiveness of the institution of Lokayukta. There exists a wide variety in composition and functioning of these institutions at the state level. Therefore, uniformity of their structures, power, functions and jurisdiction has been underlined from time to time and it merits serious consideration. Successive Lokayukta Conferences have demanded Constitutional status to these institutions on the pattern of the Election Commission and the Comptroller and Auditor General of India. I see great merit in this proposal. However, before granting such status, there is a need to objectively assess the performance of these institutions. The selection process of Lokayukta has to be made sufficiently robust and impartial to inspire confidence among the people. Lokayuktas also need to evolve procedures for carrying on business, which should be systematic, speedy and effective. This will ensure that citizens not only get justice but also see justice being done in a reasonable time frame. By giving adequate powers and resources to handle complaints and take up independent investigation, we can facilitate this process.

As institutions to look into the conduct of highly placed public functionaries, the Lokayukta is a potent instrument to keep a check on administrative high-handedness and injustice. It should not be perceived as an overbearing organisation creating bottlenecks in the functioning of Government and coming in the way of administrative machinery in carrying out its duties. In fact by pointing out mistakes, identifying problem areas and exposing the black sheep in administration, the Lokayukta is rendering valuable service in making our State Governments more effective. In this sense it is an institution which is a friend of the administration and complements the national effort for good governance. At the same time, it must be understood that we live in a world of uncertainty and administrative decisions have, of necessity, to factor in this uncertainty. Public policy processes are concerned with the uncertain future, whereas judicial processes are about facts that have occurred in the past. What may look flawed ex-poste may seem to be the best course of action ex-ante. It must therefore, be the endeavour of bodies like the Lokayukta to ensure that honest errors of judgement are not confused for acts of corruption or inefficiency. Otherwise, there is a great danger that our system of public administration, which grinds very slowly, may show further deterioration.

It is of course, a persistent feeling of Lokayuktas that information sought by them from the Government is not given to them in time by our bureaucracy. Absence of prompt and effective communication between the Government and Lokayuktas is a major cause of the inadequacies noticed in Lokayuktas in their impact on the functioning of Government machinery. I hope credible steps can be taken to make good this deficiency.

As the recommendations of Lokayuktas have always been recommendatory or advisory in nature, Governments are not duty bound to carry out them. Therefore, the Lokayuktas of several States have requested for the cooperation of Governments in implementing these recommendations. I have mentioned earlier that such institutions are necessary complements to our strategies for good governance. Therefore, by extending co-operation to the Lokayuktas, State Governments can help to promote good governance.

Another measure, which deserves careful consideration, relates to the creation of a Committee of Legislature, consisting of members from all political parties, which could examine the possibilities of implementing the recommendations of the Lokayukta. After all, the Lokayukta is a product of the legislative process. Therefore, the Legislature should take care to see that recommendations of the Lokayukta do not gather dust. These should be widely publicized and public opinion created to evaluate their recommendations.

While sharing my ideas with you in this important Conference, my mind goes to the larger issues and measures, which can eventually address the issue of corruption in our public life in a more holistic manner. My experience is over-regulation and excessive discretion built into the design of public policy are important contributory factors in this regard. Excessive bureaucratisation of economic and social processes leads to delays in taking decisions and implementation thereof. It also increases the scope of corruption in our public administration. Therefore, we have to address this issue of over-regulation and that is what economic reforms introduced since the 1990s are about. Over-regulation often leads to poor governance. It has been said that as a country we are over-regulated and under-governed. This makes the logic of the programme of economic liberalisation including policies involving tax reforms, but the issue of corruption in public life has wider dimensions. It is necessary to go beyond the simplification of administrative procedures and take a holistic view of the processes which generate this phenomenon of corruption in public life. In this context, the relations between Government as owner of public enterprises and the management of these enterprises deserves careful consideration. The effort should be to establish a truly arms length relation between the Government as owner and management of public enterprise. The second important thing that occurs to me is modern government is something which cannot be wished away. All over the world, the role of government in the life of a nation is increasing. Government procurement policies therefore, merit an objective analysis. Therefore, procurement on behalf of the Government there ought to be a review of policies, procedures and programmes of procurement in the public sector to ensure that these processes and procedures do not leave any scope for corruption.

Then, there is also the wider issue of financing of political parties and financing of elections in our country. There is a wealth of data, undissected but this is also a subject, which merits public debate to create a climate of public opinion where reforms can be introduced in the financing of the political parties and election processes in our governance. At the same time, I do recognize that there is an urgent need to have a fresh look at the procedure and functioning of our administrative machine. This is one of the crucial steps we have to take as part of the gamut of measures to reform our public administration. It is with this in view that the National Common Minimum Programme commits our government to the setting up of an Administrative Reforms Commission to prepare a detailed blueprint for revamping the public administration system. Necessary action is being taken very shortly in this regard.

In conclusion, I would like to say that I am sure that the 8th Conference of Lokayuktas and Uplokayuktas has afforded opportunities to all of you to exchange ideas and experiences and stimulate constructive thought for meaningful action. The instrumentality of Ombudsman is of immense significance in revitalising democratic institutions all over the world. In our own country, while such an institution has been found useful at the State level, we have to replicate it at the national level by enacting appropriate legislation. At the same time, I also take note of your recommendation of a need for Central legislation to amend the Constitution to make it obligatory for all states to set up the institution of Lokayukta.

Just five months after Independence, Mahatma Gandhi had said, 'Today politics has become corrupt. Anybody who goes into politics gets contaminated. The greater the inner purity, the greater shall be our hold on the people, without any effort on our part'. We have to cultivate 'the inner purity' at all levels - of the individual, of the society and of the nation - for enlisting people's support for purging the system of corruption, inefficiency and sluggishness. While Lokayuktas and Uplokayuktas are of paramount importance in our daunting struggle for creating such an India of our dreams, we have to build a national movement and public opinion for hastening the process of ensuring probity in public life. I am confident that your Conference is a step in that direction and I have, therefore, great pleasure in extending my greetings and good wishes to all of you for your future success."