Under Jammu and Kashmir Public Men Declaration of Assets and Other Provisions Act, 1983 a public man—a member of either house of the State Legislature; a member of the Council of Ministers including a Minister of State; a member of the Municipal Council or Town Area Committee or an elected member of a Notified Area Committee; a Chairman of the Municipal Committee/ Council or Town Area Committee or Notified Area Committee is required to submit annual returns of the assets held by him or his family members in the month of January every year. The purpose of these measures is to keep a watch on public men raising properties disproportionate to their means of income and in that case the law of accountability will come into force and they will be asked to explain the source of income. The purpose of these measures is to ensure transparency and accountability. When we say that corruption should be eradicated from our administrative system and other establishments, it is but natural that rules and regulations that would ensure a society without corruption have to be legislated and implemented. But to be pragmatic, the matter cannot stop at the stage of submitting property report annually. The subsequent process should follow. The subsequent process is that the concerned authorities should launch scrutiny process to find out cases in which there has been substantial increase in the value of property declared during the year of assessment.
The curious thing about this Act is that the property declared by the public men is never made public and people are not told anything about it. The strange thing is that while the declared assets of the Chief Justice and other Judges of the High Court or those of the bureaucrats are put on the website and brought to the public domain, the assets of the law makers are not made public. The Presiding Officers of the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council may allow the report on assets made public but only after the consent of the law maker concerned. In this way, we find that the law makers are almost exempted from the reach of the Act and they are treated as a special class. So far, these assets reports have never been subjected to scrutiny and as such taking any action against an incumbent for amassing assets disproportionate to his normal income does not arise. Though the Ranbir Penal Code does stipulate punishment for acquiring assets beyond the scope of normal income because that tantamount to corruption, yet that part of the Act has never been implemented.
The question is why do the law makers try to categorise themselves as a privileged class. The point is that the people who vote the legislators to sit in the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council naturally have the right to know if they so desire details of their assets. One more anomaly is discernible. At the time of elections, the prospective candidates are required to make a declaration of their assets and they do so. The EC brings this report to the public domain. If the law makers have no objection to declaring their assets to the Election Commissioner why should they have any objection of bringing this information to the public domain. It makes little sense to be secretive about it. The assets information of the judges of the High Court is put on the website and so are the assets of the bureaucrats as well but those of the legislators are not brought to the public domain on annual basis.
In final analysis we find that there should not be discrimination in treating the organs of the state in accordance with the law of the land. If corruption is to be eradicated, legislators have to be a model for the society and if legislators treat themselves separate from the rest of the society, they cannot be called true representatives of the people.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel