Anti Corruption Movement

Relevance:
The most popular figure for two weeks- Anna, because 1. Media covered powerfully. 2. Anna was Gandhian(non-violent movement), 3. Anna drew support of prominent figures like Arvind Kejriwal(former IRS), Kiran Bedi(former IPS), Shanti Bhushn(ex CJI), Prashant Bhushan(eminent lawer), etc. 4. Anna s character was sublime, 5 (the most important) Movement aspired to eradicate a menace which is suffered by innumerable Indians irrespective of caste, religion or community and which is pertinent after 60 years of Political Independence.
Lokpal:
It is widely known to everyone the key points of various version of Lokpal draft. I have opinion which is more close to Lokpal version presented by Aruna Roy. It was most debated that Lokpal should not be made superpowerful otherwise there is risk of being Lokpal itself corrupt. She kept Judiciary away from ambit of Lokpal and proposed judicial accountability Bill separately.

I believe no form is fully perfect. It must be developed progressively by trial and error. The constitution makers gave a trial which after 60 years of working pointed out major error in form of loopholes for corrupts. We Indians must give another trial in whatever form we believe the best suited and expect another round of correction.
Representation:
We send our MPs and MLAs to represent ourselves and hope them to work in our interest. They argue that Parliament is supreme (Indeed they want to say Parliamentarians are the supreme). Parliament represents the interest of people at large. What if Parliamentarians do not work in the interest of people? The movement supported by large population represents the interests of people of not only those who are actively participating but also of those who preferred to pursue their interest in other daily works, and who(- the masses) are not aware of their interest in corruption free society.

Electoral Representation in our system assumes that people are aware of their interests and they will elect those who keep their interest. But this assumption is flawed. This is reason behind the support for Anna movement which came only from educated class.
True representation:
Although the fraction of our population participating proactively into the movement was too low, it is widely accepted that people’s sentiment to get rid of corruption was strong. I was traveling in auto, when traffic personnel were seen away and inactive in disposing the jammed lane, he articulated Anna with his support in his voice. I was on call to my relative near my village, whole family enquired about me participating in the movement. This surprised me as there is no means of communication of daily news like TV, newspaper, etc.

They might not be able to think pros and cons of the bill, but failure of our representative parliamentary system is known by all. They know that they are fooled in elections and have no right to demand their interest till the next election. Does representative democracy only mean to elect a so called “suitable candidate”? Do they not have right to ask them to be accountable to them till 5 years?
Lokpal Impeachment:
It is tested that after Election Commission was made independent, it has worked exemplarily. The top section of our judiciary (Supreme Court) has remained accountable, transparent and just (as most of us believe). On the same lines Lokpal, I believe, is far less likely to be corrupt. We can afford to give it a chance. It always remains in light of educated people, thinkers and Media.

Let us expect sooner or later an effective bill is introduced into our “Constitution”. We expect one more progress in making of our public order. Ministers say parliament is supreme whether is working for our people or not. Our preamble, the soul of our constitution lay emphasis on “We the people of India..” Isn t there a divergence?