My issues with the Proposed Jan Lok Pal Bill

The Government of India is lurching from crisis to crisis. And, all of these have one thing in common –  complicity of ministers’, Alliance Partners’, MP’s in crime –and the Government turning a blind eye to the pillage that has been going on. Worse, and more galling,  than the blind eye – is its sheer brazenness when confronted by the loot. Be it Kapil Sibal on 2G or Abhishek Manu Sanghvi on Anna Hazare’s fast – they have been brazen to the core. UPA2 needs to realise they have not been voted as rulers of India in perpetuity, rather as administrators – and that too for a period of 5 years.

Obviously there has been furore. But, one has taken the furore with a bag of salt. When the media screams it is because it chooses to make money from outrage. When the opposition screams – it is because they have not been able to partake in the spoils. Cynical, but the nature of politics, political discourse and the public space has been so opportunistic and so devoid of values – that it is not difficult to go with the “Sab Chor Hai” attitude.

However, one person stands tall and apart from all this dirt, and has managed to put his finger on the pulse of the quiet anger that has swept the country. And, that is veteran Gandhian, Anna Hazare. He has been campaigning tirelessly against corruption across the country. And in particular,  in my home state of Maharashtra. Amongst the campaigns he has waged has been the one against Lavasa – where a combination of Private Sector greed and Ministerial avarice has robbed Tribals of their forest land.

His current protest is against corruption in general, and  the Government’s Lok Pal Bill in particular. Anna Hazare believes – and rightly so – the Government’s proposed anti-corruption bill is an exercise in futility, a mode of letting the status quo stand.

The Government’s Lok Pal bill is pretty much like any Government action on corruption. It is the equivalent of setting up a committee and hoping that those who complain will die before things are resolved. Furthermore, it’s Lok Pal bill has no teeth, can take no action against the corrupt. It can merely recommend. India against corruption has a succinct critique of the Government’s proposed bill. If you have the time, do read it.

Anna Hazare is demanding a more powerful Lok Pal – one with teeth that can take action against the corrupt, including depriving them of ‘ill gotten’ assets. The bill that he proposes, called the Jan Lok Pal, is a comprehensive document that looks at how action against corrupt can be undertaken

In an ideal world, with honest and truthful citizens, and a few corrupt officials this will be the best Act since Universal Franchise. However, we do not live in an Ideal World.

Till yesterday morning I was all for the bill, and then I read the bill in detail. What i will set down here are my issues with the bill. This does not mean I don’t want the people to be involved in drafting of the bill, it also does not mean i support the Government on their version of the  bill – I don’t.

At the first level – and in effect it stops there – it is the ability to go “j’accuse’ on people in Public life – it doesn’t matter if they are innocent or guilty. You believe that they have done something wrong, and you have the right to complain and ask for a review.

I quote now from the proposed bill, those clauses i find problematic. The rest i am more or less ok with.

1)Action” means any action taken by a public servant in the discharge of his functions as such public servant and includes decision, recommendation or finding or in any other manner and includes willful failure or omission to act and all other expressions relating to such action shall be construed accordingly;

7)grievance” means a claim by a person that he sustained injustice or undue hardship in consequence of mal-administration;

9) “Mal-administration” means action taken or purporting to have been taken in the exercise of administrative function in any case where,-

  1. such action or the administrative procedure or practice governing such action is unreasonable, unjust, oppressive or improperly discriminatory; or
  2. there has been willful negligence or undue delay in taking such action or the administrative procedure or practice governing such action involves undue delay;

So, for example,  I am unhappy with my property tax evaluation – I believe that the civil servant in charge has done this so that he can come back and ask for a bribe – i have the right to go to the Lok Ayukta. They will investigate. The time frame for the investigation is a year. And then they will pronounce their verdict. If the property tax officer was actually doing his job – and has valued my home on the right basis, what happens…Similarly take any case, forest official refuses permission for a person/company to expand their operations into the forest area. The official is following the law. But, vested interests decide the best way of expressing their ‘grievance” is to file a charge of ‘mal administration’ then what happens….

This part of the proposed bill can only work if there are exceedingly strong measures put in place to deter people from bringing in false accusations. Lets face facts – in India, especially in the last decade or so, it is easy to accuse, less easy to prove and almost impossible to clear your name. Cases are motivated as much by malice as they are by facts. Unless people who bring false charges end up getting penalised and facing jail terms – the bill in its current form is going to end up stalling all decision making. There needs to be a better way of achieving the same aim.

The Jan Lok Pal bill v.1.9 is well intentioned – but Utopian.  And like most things Utopian,  the proposed JanLokPal Bill, as it has been framed now, is dangerous – it is best summed up on twitter by @dubash

We can either look for good men to occupy high office, or create a good law that bad men can use to eliminate each other.

My second issue is more technical. The bulk of the provisions and definitions of the proposed Jan Lok Ayukta bill are based on the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1988. That bill too has the provision of special courts and special trials and the like.  The Act, although it exists in the Statute books, has not had much success. Primarily because corruption has to be proved – and that means you have to catch someone in the Act of asking and taking money. Entrapment is one way of getting there – but that is in a legally grey area. So, the question remains – how do you prove corruption? One is knowing someone is corrupt or has practised nepotism (that too falls under the purview of the PCA) – the more difficult thing is to prove it.

I am all for a war on corruption. But setting up a separate machinery to prove & prosecute corruption, is just adding one more layer of bureaucracy for me. Far more effective may be taking up the following:

  • Clear legal back log on a war footing over the next 5 years
  • Have time bound legal cases – the way it happens in the USA or most of Europe.
  • Have a National Prosecution Service with teeth – and pay its lawyers better
  • Give the CBI true independence
  • Bring in much talked about Police Reforms
  • More transparency in Government operations
  • An effective mechanism of protecting whistle blowers – both in Government and in Private Sector

And finally, I support Anna Hazare in his demand for a more effective Lok Pal Bill. But, I don’t believe that the Jan Lok Pal that has been drafted is that bill.


  1. Author

    I dont think Lokpal bill is creating another level of bureaucracy, its infact asking all different flavours of our vigilence departments to come under one roof and be accountable.

    1. Author

      What I like about your article is you have not only pointed out the flows but gone on to propose alternatives that could make it operationally more feasible.I must also add that the proposals in the Bill are not final and of couse fine tuning would and should happen to make the final draft more viable.

    2. Author

      unforutunately it not only creates another level of bureacracy – but one that is not accountable to anyone …

    3. Author

      1. The entire thinking behind Lokpal institution is that a strong anti corruption system would deter public servants and government servants from indulging in corrupt practices. It has no mechanism for preventing corruption to happen. It is only treatment oriented.
      2. The ultimate aim of this bill is to change/modify the behavior of Public/Government Servant but there is no incentive for the honest public servant (he/she is dependent upon service rules). Using coercive methods for change have a bad history worldwide.
      3. Section 4 of the bill relates to the Chairperson and members of Lokpal not to hold certain office and section 6 relates to appointment of Chairperson and members. Reading these two sections doesn’t clarify whether the Chairperson and its members would be Indian or foreigner. It appears that there is no bar on Lokpal being a foreigner. Section 4 bars a person who is connected or was ever connected with a political party from holding the office but it doesn’t bar a person who is connected to a religious group/ outfit or party.
      4. The Lokpal bill proposes to repeal the Central Vigilance Commission Act and merger of anti corruption branch of CBI and departmental vigilance with the institution of Lokpal. The entire structure of operation and its functioning with other law enforcing authorities is not clear.
      5. Lokpal is formed as a supreme institution for the effective anti-corruption and grievance redressal system at centre so that effective deterrent is created against corruption and to provide effective protection to whistleblowers. In an democratic system no institution can be given unlimited powers. No proceedings or decision of the Lokpal is liable to be challenged, reviewed, quashed or called in question in any court of ordinary Civil Jurisdiction. Such a provision is more of autocratic in nature than following the principle of natural Justice.
      6. Who will set up the Selection committee under section 6 is not clear. The selection committee is heavily tilted towards serving (the bill doesn’t mention serving or retired) bureaucrats and Judges. Civil society/citizen participation is limited to awardees of Bharat Ranta, Nobel laureates and Magsaysay Award.
      7. The selection process is not clear. Selection process is solely based on the recommendations of selection committee members who are mostly bureaucrat and Judges. There is no time frame for selection process. Section 7(h) says public feedback shall be invited on the shortlisted name but doesn’t mention or describe what will be done and how will this feedback be used. What would be the waiting period for the feedback and how citizens can make Lokpal accountable. It is presumed in the bill that the Lokpal would not need control citizens.
      8. Section 7(i) mentions that the selection committee may decide to use any means to collect more information about the background and past achievements of the shortlisted candidates. This will take time and money, who will bear the cost of it. Ultimately they will depend upon the existing institutions and authorities.
      9. Section 7(j) mentions about calling shortlisted candidates for discussion but what will be the framework of discussion is not clear. Having “unimpeachable integrity and should have demonstrated their resolve and efforts to fight against corruption” looks very vague and needs specific parameters to be defined.
      10. Section 7(l) mentions that final selections for the Chairperson and members shall be made preferably through consensus. The chairperson and members both shall be selected by the selection committee. What accountability do the selection committee carry ensure that a impartial and appropriate Lokpal is selected. Decision by consensus is a idealistic situation.
      11. Section 7(m) mentions that all meetings of selection committee shall be video recorded and shall be made public. It doesn’t mention whether video recording shall be censored or not. A censored video is of no use.
      12. The Lokpal fund appears more like a revenue generation mechanism than a fund for infrastructural requirement. The purpose of depositing the penalties/fines imposed and 10% of the loss of public money detected/prevented on account of investigation doesn’t serve the purpose when there is provision under section 14(3) to meet the Prime Minister aannually to assess the needs of Lokpal for finances and manpower and further section 5(4) charges the administrative expenses to the Consolidated fund of India. Instead a separate budget provision can be made based on the annual planning exercise of the Lokpal.
      13. The “whistleblower” is defined in the context of “threat” if there is no threat than he/she is not a whistleblower. There is already a bill called “The Whistle Blowers (Protection in Public Interest Disclosures) bill 2006 introduced in Rajya Sabha. The Lokpal bill is silent on this bill.
      14. There is already shortage of Judges in Indian Court. The government is not appointing judges and not providing infrastructure for the same. The section 13(a) requires appointment of special Judges. A proper strategy is required at national level for the appointment of required number of Judges.
      15. Section 14(7) provides for taking decision to initiate investigation or prosecution against any member of the Cabinet or any judge of High Court or Supreme Court in a meeting of all the existing members and the Chairperson. How the decision shall be taken is not clear. Is Prime Minister included or excluded under section 14(7)?
      16. Under section 26(3) regarding complaints against officers and employees of Lokpal, the investigations shall be completed within one month of receipt of the complain but it is not clear who will conduct such investigation. Who will head the separate investigative wing made of such investigations. How can Lokpal conduct investigation against it’s staff when the bill itself is stating that for all other public authorities the CVO will not be from the same authority.
      17. It is not clear whether Lokpal is a Public authority or a government authority.

      1. Author

        It is better to give suggestion rather than pointing out or finding out its missing points if we really want it to come in force.

      2. Author

        First of all I must say you have a deep knowledge of Lok pal bill. Instead of just gather and support we all first must understand the Lok pal bill completely. Otherwise we might face consequences in future just like reservation system. I am in support of Anna hajare that he wants to remove corruption but also agreed to your points.

  2. Author

    Partly agree with you. as in strong laws are already present but it is all on the implementors.
    finding loopholes and corrupting the un-corrupt has long been in fashion.

    As far as receiving fake or confused cases in concerned. I find a parallel in the Consumer courts. They are/were a parallel machinary and people have benefitted from it.
    Them being fast and effective, have rightly been identifying the sincere cases and imparting balanced justice.

    My only question or request is : that people who are supporting it and propagating too, are they ready to be a part of Lokayuktas and Lokpal?
    I have faith on these people but would they be the one who would run it impartially?
    And here I am not talking of those 10 people we all know, but the twitterati / the ones fasting .. the honest common man I know.

    1. Author

      the problem is not the existance of laws – india has more than its fair share of them. the problem has been implementing those laws. on the face of it with the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 you should have killed corruption.

      No, while i believe their heart is in the right place i don’t think that they are going about it the right way… they want a system that only trusts NGO’s – I dont’ trust NGO’s – have seen too many work at close quarters …

  3. Author

    my point of view is that this is not the solution to corruption.. just one of the ways.. and this will need to be refined from time to time.. as happens in a democracy
    but it is a step in the right direction,.. and that is what matters

    1. Author

      thank you – in highlighting corruptioin yes. in the solution offered, no.

  4. Author

    You say you’ve read them all, but some of your comments do not indicate that.

    BTW, if not for Anna Hazare and this movement that is building rapidly, when was the last time we had a discussion about our anti-corruption systems?

    I don’t think any one who participated in drafting the Jan Lokpal expects it be enacted to the letter. A legislation is something that is supposed to be discussed and debated in the Legislature. If the main points of Jan Lokpal are discussed in Parliament and outside, that creates larger awareness.

    This argument about ‘extra layer’ is bogus. In contrary, the JanLokpal proposes removal of redunadant layers by merging CVC and parts of CBI into Jan Lokpal.

    CVC reported that more than Rs 50,000 Crores of govt money in 8 schemes is unaccounted for. Great. Then what happened? and how many such ‘indepedent’ reports we got from CVC till date?

    CBI – how come CBI comes into picture when ruling party needs votes during no confidence motion or to save coalition dharma?

    Karnataka is a good example of a situation where ‘great individuals’ (Justice Santosh Hegde) is in Lokayukta but unable to deliver strong blows to corruption due to lack of powers. Hope you can research this further and come to conclusions.

    Jan Lokpal may be utopian in parts, but let’s acknowledge that it is creating waves in the country, common man today understands we need strong deterrent and for all the talk about fighting corruption, none of the major parties actually did anything about it.

    1. Author

      i teach, therefore, one has these discussions in class. sometimes with friends.
      the entire selection criteria of the JPL is scary and elitist..
      the rest of your argument, i believe i have addressed in my post.
      thank you for commenting.

  5. Author

    Good read. Lot of loopholes in the Jan. Lok Pal…..but still feel the process of tackling corruption has to start somewhere. All for Anna Hazare.

    1. Author

      for him highlighting the issue and taking the Government to task…not sure about the solution or this over reliance on a few good men and women who are internationally acknowledged …

  6. Author

    Jan lok pal bill is as important as our democracy. It’s a time to government to show that they believe in democracy and not corruption oriented system.

    My full support to Mr. Anna Hazare, who is initiate this campaign. Now, it’s a time for youth of our country to show their anger against corrupt system, and demolish it from the root of to ensure bright future of our country and our next generation….. JAI HO !

    1. Author


  7. Author

    Independent of the numerous short-comings of the bill, the JanLokpal Bill is a better starting point as a draft as compared to the Lokpal bill. Also, on the larger point of “proving corruption”, if anyone is found with disproportionate assets and also facing corruption charges then the onus of proving innocence must be on the accused. This provision might be a possible game changer when it comes to achieving convictions.

  8. Author

    you have not really read the draft I believe, the Lokpal will ofcourse see the evidences and strength of case before ‘maligning’ any one… more over, it has provision of strigent punishment which is not there in the corruption act. SO pls, dnt jst criticize a man’s sacrifise for sake of criticizing it.

    1. Author

      Provisions for punishment in the Prevention of Corruption Act are below. Please read the statutes that you insist others haven’t read:

      12. Punishment for abetment of offences defined in section 7 or 11
      Whoever abets any offence punishable under section 7 or section 11 whether or not that offence is committed in consequence of that abetment, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall be not less than six months but which may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine.

      14. Habitual committing of offence under sections 8, 9 and 12
      Whoever habitually commits-
      (a) an offence punishable under section 8 or section 9; or
      (b) an offence punishable under section 12,
      shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall be not less than two years but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.

      15. Punishment for attempt
      Whoever attempts to commit an offence referred to in clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 13 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine.

  9. Author

    Wait, I think I have been misquoted even though I have been quoted fully and accurately : )

    When I tweeted “We can either look for good men to occupy high office, or create a good law that bad men can use to eliminate each other.”, I was responding to the general sentiment that we need good people in power. Although a fine sentiment. I do not see that as being very practical. What I would prefer is actually “a good law”. One that is specifically designed to make it easy for people to bring forth complaints. A law that provides for sufficient institutional resources, to then investigate and prosecute corrupt officials.

    I would like to see Sharad Pawar use it to get rid of INC politicians in the hopes he is the last man standing. And no doubt INC will use it against it Sharad Pawar for their selfish interests. As long as all sides can use it equally, I am fine with it. I’ve given up hope that any of them will do the right for the sake of the country. But I suspect all of them will work tirelessly if they see some benefit in it for themselves.

    I do agree with you that there is a danger of misuse. I hope the law that is put into place accounts for this.

    I agree that the current government version seems toothless. And as you’ve pointed out the Hazare version has it’s own problems.

    We need a third version. And we already agree, that, there is body in parliamentary democracies with plenty of free time on it’s hands to offer cogent critiques of upcoming legislation — the opposition. They could put their brainpower (many fine lawyers amongst them) and all their free time to some productive use.

  10. Author

    Wants to LOOT India? Be safe and not to be Prosecuted? Be a Govt Official, Bureaucrat or Politicians. This is the direct message by Govt by making all laws to protect them from Criminal charges and no action could be taken legally. The result is Judges becomes LAW MAFIA, Army Officials becomes LAND MAFIAS, Tainted Officials becomes BLOOD SUCKERS and Corrupt Politicians are like TERMITES who eats away the base of country. The only solution is Jan Lokpal Bill to bring and put them in Jail . Support ANNA HAZARE, Save INDIA……JAI HIND.

  11. Author

    I have no problems with the Jan Lokpal Bill. In fact, my problem is with the one the government initially tried to push through before Anna Hazare threw the proverbial spanner in the works. What he has proposed looks sound to me. The New Lokpal Bill is yet to be drafted. This will also give a perspective to us whether Anna Hazare’s action has indeed been honest. I would like to think it is.

    Let’s see how the accountability of those responsible is fixed. I am sure there would be mechanisms to check mala fide use of the provisions of the law.

    The points that you have mentioned are valid. However, we must not miss the woods for the trees here. Small problems would arise. That shouldn’t, however, make us lose perspective of the bigger benefits of having such a law in place.

    Having said that, I am keeping my fingers crossed till the draft bill is public.

  12. Author

    You have to trust an experienced and respected man like Anna Hazzare. He is not novice in this field.
    To be straight forward I think you are on of those who like pointing out faults only. Instead of proposing these (very obvious) solution I would like to ask you if you are doing anything to remove corruption other than pointing loopholes in others’ efforts.
    actions always speak louder than words and this time you can hear all the words roaring all across India. That is the power of an act.
    If you can’t practice what you preach then please stop preaching.

  13. Author

    i think we are all getting over emotional here. i by and large agree with the reccomendations of the author. how long are we going to pretend to ignore the fact that basic and crucial flaws and voids exist in the system of governance that is in place – a constitutional set up more appropriate for tiny nation, outdated and obsolescent laws/ penal codes, a defunct lower judiciary, an ineffective criminal prosecution system, an over-centralized administrative bureaucratic system originally and inherently designed for colonial and autocratic rule, continued and inexplicable orientation for leadership at ministerial and departmental levels by unqualified and non-specialist functionaries and so on and on. why shouldn’t we leave our elected legislators to concentrate on legislative responsibilities, an onerous task by itself and have a truly independent, specialised and accountable executive in place? we imbibe the principle of separation and independence of legislature, executive and judiciary and their mutual accountability as the pillars of democracy – is this achieved when the executive and legislature are one and the same, and they control the entire public prosecution machinery? please think and dwell on these issues.

  14. Author

    Kya me kisi prakar Arbind Kezriwal ji tak apni baat pahucha sakta hu… koi hai ki unse me kaise sampark kar sakta hu bata paaye.
    1- Agar ham Police dwara banwanya jaane wala Character Certificate banwane jaate hai to waha baabu ko 20 rupey ki fees k jo 120 rupey dene padte hain wo na dene na pade fir inquiry k naam par jo Police wale near Thane se aate hain wo bi 100- se upar tak jitne me mamala pat jaaye lete hain fir jab aap SSP Office ya DIG office me us prepare certificate ko lene jaate hain to fir 100 se upar tak jitne me maamla pat jaaye ye sab paisa wo student dete jinhe Kisi service k liye Apply karna padta hai ….
    2- agar koi Cast Certificate banwane jaataa hai to waha bi kai prakar ki rishwat se aamna saama hota hai
    3-Agar koi Kisi University me apna Certificate lene jaata hai to bi rishwat deni padti hai..
    4- Agar koi apna Domicile ( Mulniwas ) Certificate banwane jaataa hai to use Lekhpal ko bi rishwat deni padti hai …
    5- Agar use Heath Certificate lena ho to use wah bi rishwat deni padti hai
    Aise hamre SARKARI OFFICE bahut jagah sirf or Sirf Rishwat se apna kaam karwana padta hai nahi to babu log usko tarkaate hain agar aap koi sampark dikha kar bina riswat k kaam karwan chahate hain to wo usme kai prakar ki problems bata kar lotaana chahte hai agar fir bi wo use le bi le to wo certificate bhale hi TIN DIN me bankar mil sakta hai lekin wo aapko ek mahina se jyada samay lag jayega to ab dekhte hai isme kya LOK PAL BILL karagar ho payega …
    UPAAY KYA HO SAKTA HAI —- Agar aisa koi tarika ho ki hamara form online jama ho sake ya hame apne Babu se milna na pade aur Kisi Certificate k liye jaruri Documents aise kisi Tarike se jamaa kar de ki BAABU se mile bagair jamaa ho jaaye aur us CERTIFICATE ko banane ka KAM SE KAM TIME nischit awasay hona chahiye…
    Kyonki Rishwat se koi bi cetificate 2 din me mil jaataa hai to JAN LOK PAL BILL SE kitne din me mil jaayega …

  15. Author

    Very rightly said “This part of the proposed bill can only work if there are exceedingly strong measures put in place to deter people from bringing in false accusations. Lets face facts – in India, especially in the last decade or so, it is easy to accuse, less easy to prove and almost impossible to clear your name. Cases are motivated as much by malice as they are by facts. Unless people who bring false charges end up getting penalised and facing jail terms – the bill in its current form is going to end up stalling all decision making. There needs to be a better way of achieving the same aim.”
    I cent percent agree with you and feel that this should in any case be taken care of.

  16. Author

    With all the due respect dude.. do you feel that this article shows your “intellect”. You and people are absolute poison to the process. Your arm chair philosophers better quit the country as you said.

    We do not require unwanted mess like you in this country. I am sure Rahul ‘dumbwit’ Gandhi will join you in this paadyatra for aam aadmi who you would have last seen in a television.

    PS: Please get your spellings and grammar right.

  17. Author

    Excellent post and glad to see that you have some informed and educated opinions on this topic. I wish more did!

    I would like to point out though, that they do have a section in the bill for people who make false claims. With so much going on in that bill, I can understand how you missed it. 🙂

    31. Penalty for false complaint- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, if someone makes any false or frivolous complaint under this Act, Lokpal may impose such fines on that complainant as it deems fit.
    Provided that no fine can be imposed without giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
    (2) Such fines shall be recoverable as dues under Land Revenue Act.
    (3) A complaint or allegation once made under this Act shall not be allowed to be withdrawn.

    I think they should take it a step further and post this on a public site so that people know who is guilty of this. I also think that possible prosecution should be at least on the table for repeat offenders. In the US, there are quite a few laws for making false claims depending on the nature for the crime (different for against government as opposed to against a private person). Some of these carry jail time.

    Ultimately, while I think that the bill does have some excellent points, I feel that it should play a part in a much larger role. People will continue to act in corrupt ways until they are afraid of being caught and other’s will help them because they don’t know any different. A movement to bring more people into the voting process with educated and bi-partisan knowledge would be a great start.

    Once again, thanks for the post!

  18. Author

    India is a democracy and in a democracy the people have a right to express their thoughts and opinions. The author of this article DID do his part in this by pointing out issues he had with the bill and giving examples of how to fix it.

    By pointing out issues that you may see with your government you are not only helping to educate other’s to these flaws, but helping to bring about change.

    This is the same that Anna Hazare is doing, he just has a much larger audience to speak to. If you are for Anna, how can you be against someone wanting to make what he is doing BETTER? Isn’t Anna all for the rights of the people? Who are you to take them away?

    And finally, I think Anna would not want you to “just trust” ANYONE blindly. Even himself. I think instead, he would want you to have a voice of your own. @ STY:

  19. Author

    I think issue of anna hazara jon lok pal & lok pal bills are true. Why not support by political party. My idea all political leader should advantage for this issue otherwise ruin

  20. Author


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *