On tackling 'corruption' with Justice Jeevan Reddy.
Perspectives DEBATE / Can we tackle corruption? -- Justice BP Jeevan Reddy
Law Commission of India has released a working paper proposing legislation to forfeit property of public servants possessing illegally acquired properties .
It may be recalled that the Supreme Court in 1996 observed that a law providing for forfeiture of properties acquired by holders of public office by indulging in corrupt and illegal acts was a crying necessity. This decision is the moving force behind the Law Commission's proposal.
The Law Commission has observed that corruption is threatening the very security and safety of the State. In the Comm-ission's view, one of the essential requirements of good governance is the absence of corruption. The Commission has obs-erved that the Prevention of Corruption Act and indeed the criminal justice system in India have failed to effectively deal with the canker of corruption, for, the number of prosecutions under the Prevention of Corruption Act is quite low and the high-ups are able to escape from the clutches of law due to long-drawn proceedings.
The Commission has noted that though there is a provision for forfeiture of properties under the Prevention of Corruption Act, nothing can be done unless a person is convicted under the Act. The Commission further notes that even under the Prevention of Money Laundering Bill, 1998, the confiscation of proceeds of crime is possible only after a person is convicted of an offence mentioned in the Schedule. The Schedule to this Bill does not include the offence of possession of disproportionate assets.
In proposing a legislation for forfeiture of property of public servants, the Law Commission has relied on the scheme of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (popularly known as SAFEMA) .
The legislation proposed by the Law Commission would reach not only properties of the public servants, but also assets or properties in the hand of relatives or associates of such public servants.
The proposed law contemplates issuance of a show cause notice to public servants believed to be holding or in possession of illegally acquired properties to explain and establish that those properties have been acquired by lawful means. The burden of proving this act is placed upon the public servant. The Competent Authority, namely, the Central Vigilance Commissioner and other Vigilance Commissioners, will have the power to call upon any public servant believed to be in possession of illegally acquired properties to disclose, by affidavit, the properties held by him, his relatives and associates. Refusal to disclose or a false disclosure entails punishment of imprisonment. Indeed, the contemplated law would make the very holding of or possession of illegally acquired properties an offence punishable with imprisonment, in addition to forfeiture of such properties.
The proposed Bill confers all necessary powers upon the Competent Authority. They include power to call upon a public servant to disclose the properties held by him, his relatives and associates, whether held in India or abroad. Power is also given to him to attach the properties of a public servant (his relatives and associates). The C.A. also has the power to call upon any authority to conduct necessary enquiry and investigation or conduct raid, inspection or survey and seizure. The very holding of illegally acquired properties is made a punishable offence with the result that the Central government can take proceedings for identifying and seizing the assets slashed abroad by corrupt public servants including ministers and MPs, both past and present.
economictimes.com
|
