Saturday, August 14, 2010

Whistleblowers Law on the anvil

The Tribune, New Delhi, August 14, 2010, P 12
Law to protect whistleblowers
The decision of the Union Cabinet to clear the decks for the introduction of “The Public Interest Disclosure and Protection to Persons Making the Disclosure Bill, 2010” in Parliament is laudable (news report, “Bill to protect whistleblowers okayed”, Aug 10). A comprehensive and efficacious law for the protection of whistleblowers has been hanging fire for some time. In the wake of the murder of Sateyendra Kumar Dubey in 2003, the Supreme Court of India was seized of the matter and issued directions to the Central government to do the needful.
Consequently, the government had issued a resolution in 2004 on public interest disclosures and protection of informers wherein the government authorised the Central Vigilance Commission to receive written complaints for disclosure on any allegation of corruption or misuse of office and recommend appropriate action.
In 2006, the government introduced The Whistleblowers (Protection In Public Interest Disclosures) Bill, 2006, in the Rajya Sabha. Sadly, thereafter, the Bill went into oblivion. In August 2009, the CBI in its 17th Biennial Conference of Heads of States Anti-Corruption Bureau exhorted Parliament to enact the Whistle Blower Act as recommended by the U.N. Convention against corruption and directed by the Supreme Court of India.
The Public Interest Disclosure and Protection to Persons Making the Disclosure Bill, 2010, envisages an exceedingly vital role for the CVC to protect the interests of the whistleblowers. The grievances of the RTI activists regarding the failure of the CVC to protect the interests of whistleblowers, particularly the failure to shield their identity, have amply been taken care of in the proposed Bill by way of providing for stringent punishment for the violators.
The murder of RTI activist Amit Jethwa in Gujarat again shows that social crusaders are on a sticky wicket and need to be provided an adequate and potent legal framework.
RAJENDER GOYAL, Bahadurgarh

No comments: