Contrarian view on Jan Lokpal Bill Conversation with Kartikeya Tanna

Bar & Bench spoke to Kartikeya Tanna (pictured) on the Jan Lokpal Bill and the constitutional concerns it may pose. Kartikeya has researched and authored several articles on separation of powers,


rajashekar b s

August 21, 2011 - 6:02pm

anna team knows their fight will soon become redundant. people will go to their jobs leaving anna team to their fate. anna team is telling that govt is arrogant. but it is anna team who is arrogant. if you ask the people the question that if jan lok pal will end corruption? 100 % i am sure will say no. then can it be construed as rejection of jan lok pal ? certainly no. people are for fight against corruption. but anna team is projecting it as it is againnst the govt. secondly, why anna team which is calling govt with bad words wants the govt. to place the bill in parliament and get it passed. because, they know govt has majority and they are with the govt. this shows the true colours of anna team. they dont want to listen to consensus view. this is because, they very well know that no sane person will support their anarchial views. what happens if lokpal is given sweeping powers? lokpal will file a case on presumption that a person is guilty. then the investigation is done to search for documents and prove that lokpal is right.then how can the acused get an opportunity to appeal, sinch the investigator is also the judge. janlokpal wants centralisation of all lokayuktas, then this will become like one more cbi. because the state govt may acuse centre that lokpal is acting at the behest of central govt. centre may try to influence lokpal with its staff / committee members. anna says listen only to their team. this is undemocratic. we have been without lokpal for 65 years. let us wait until a real, democratic, purposeful, meaningful, and strong lokpal emerge. let every common man ;has right to express his/her views. for that anna team should educate people of their views instead of talking nonsense and hunger strikes. then the people may reject most of anna views and give a go ahead to government to comeout with a people bill



April 24, 2011 - 12:33pm

The harmonious construction doctrine may, as the writer suggests, permit a sort of uneasy co-existence between the Judiciary and the office of Lok Pal however two evils become apparent1) that successful road-maps to reduce corruption emphasize getting rid of ambiguities and areas of institutional friction. Harmonious construction doctrine itself arose out of a dirigiste Economic policy where the presumed univocity of the Public Sector, to which the predominant 'commanding heights' role was given, could be held to provide a justification for the doctrine. Clearly, if the Public Sector has a limited role and moreover if policy objectives (which, if limited, must be conflicting) have their own policy instruments then no such univocity can be construed to obtain. In this case, surely, the entire doctrine should be abandoned. Thus, sooner or later, conflict between the Judiciary and the LokPal's office (unless it is rendered ineffective) becomes inevitable.2)If harmonious construction means treating the Lokpal as a sort of amphibian- part of the Executive some of the time and independent of it at others- the question naturally arises as to hybrid actions initiated jointly with Govt. Agencies or the Judiciary. To what extent do such hybrid actions or bodies share this amphibious nature? At root, the Lok Pal agitation is premised upon the axiomatic 'Independence' and purity of the office it proposes. Yet, not content to be an amphibian the Lok Pal wishes to be a sort of ouroburos, a snake swallowing its own tail, investigating its own independence. Might not this chimera prove more adaptive and end up swallowing up everything else?



April 21, 2011 - 6:49am



Ajay Kumar

April 9, 2011 - 2:35pm

What we have done in the past four days is completely disregard the idea of democracy. Our democracy stems from past experiences, and they have taught us well. They have taught us that in order to make the law you have to elected. Now if the middle class wants to boycott that process that we as a people have enshrined. Then I have a problem with that.Who are they to speak for the whole of India? I am an Indian yet I still believe in the constitution. This bill must be stopped. It will set a dangerous precedent. If passed we would have killed our democracy and finally transitioned into Mob Rule. I believe that it is a part of my liberty to have the people who make my law chosen by me and not a mob. You want change then go out and vote na? How many of those people at Jantar Mantar had voter-id cards? Does Anna Hazare vote? Where has he been all this while? If he wants to change the system and has this much support elect him to Parliament na? Government's are accountable to their people. This is why we have a democracy. To do this is an affront to my sense of liberty, democracy and quite Franky my sense of reason. And remember I am not alone. A lot of people have dared to dissent against the mob. The author included. In a democracy we consider dissent to be patriotic.


Nityanand Shastri

April 8, 2011 - 10:18pm

Where was the CVC and Supreme Court when 100 scams happened right under their noses. India has the highest total swiss bank deposits in whole world, what did the Supreme Court do ? IS THERE A SINGLE PERSON IS JAIL YET (except Rajas driver who mysteriously committed suicide). The only person in jail for life is Binayak Sen who opposed mining . even Kasab is not hanged yet and enjoying his Biryani at taxpayers expense. I am ALSO 100% with Anna Hazare movement. TAKE back the country from the fake democratic institutions. GO ANNA HAZARE AND YOUTH OF INDIA. Jai Hind.

The Viewpoint - Recent Decisions on Schemes of Arrangement and Capital Reduction
Comments (0)
Wednesday, September 3, 2014 - 10:44am

Latest Tweets

Latest Tweets

Pickles & Lota: 11 September 2014

Follow us on