TO PROTECT OR TO PUNISH

The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, regulates cases of corruption by public officials in India. UPA-II in August 2013 introduced the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill but it was criticised on grounds that instead of discouraging corruption, it shielded errant bureaucrats. In 2014, the Modi government proposed additional amendments, approved by a Select Committee of the Rajya Sabha and the Cabinet. The bill is still pending in Parliament but critics say the new set of amendments provide more immunity to bureaucrats

PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988

Governs offence of giving bribe to a public servant Section 13(1)(d)* covers indirect forms of corruption including getting “any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage” by an official

Possession of monetary resources or property disproportionate to known sources of income is enough to prove corruption

Known sources of income limited to receipts that had been “intimated in accordance with...any law, rules or orders for the time being applicable to a public servant”

Requires sanction before any serving public servants can be prosecuted No need to obtain sanction to initiate probe into corrupt official No prosecution if a person, during a trial, admits to giving a bribe

If court considers reward obtained by public servant as ‘trivial’, then it shall not be presumed an act of corruption

THE PROPOSED NEW BILL

New provisions related to giving bribe to a public servant Section deleted. Fraudulent misappropriation of property, illicit, intentional enrichment and disproportionate assets now criminal

Need to prove that the public servant acquired assets disproportionate to known sources of income **

Definition now deleted Protection is extended to retired public servants if the case pertains to the period they were in office

Prior sanction needed even to probe offences Provision omitted, bribetaking and bribegiving to be equally punishable

Provision related to ‘trivial’ reward deleted

WHAT THE CHANGE MEANS

Earlier, only voluntary bribes invited punishment; now, bribes under coercion too punishable

Any benefit that is not economic, indirect or that cannot be proven to be intentional fraud will not be treated as corruption

Increases burden of proof necessary to punish the corrupt and makes things difficult for whistleblower

Accused can cite fresh sources of income at the stage of trial, something that was not possible earlier Will protect retired officials from undue harassment Additional layer will give guilty enough time to tamper with evidence

Will deter bribegivers from appearing as witnesses No favour is exempt from the definition of bribe