Needed for a comprehensive Bill

The final meeting of the Lokpal Bill's joint drafting committee is in progress and there is still no consensus on a core demand made by Anna Hazare and his supporters - that the prime minister come within its ambit. If the government's gambit of keeping the PM out of the purview of the Lokpal Bill succeeds, it will have managed to de-fang the entire concept of the Lokpal to some extent.

Given the extent to which corruption has permeated the entire Indian political system, it would be naive in the extreme to believe that the prime minister's office is immune to it. Bringing it into this new system would strengthen an interlocking system of checks and balances. The Lokpal would serve as a guarantor of the PMO's incorruptibility - or in worst-case scenarios, the rectifier - while the judiciary would keep the Lokpal in check, ensuring that an overzealous or politically motivated appointee does not hobble the prime minister. The Hazare team insists that the judiciary, too, should be under the Lokpal. But this is where it should cede ground in the name of practicality and a balance of power.

As for the Congress's argument that such a set-up would inhibit the PMO too much - and that a corrupt prime minister can be investigated after his term in office anyway - it is disingenuous. Did the Bofors investigation inhibit Rajiv Gandhi? And should a corrupt prime minister be given complete immunity, looting taxpayers for years as long as he is in office? Prosecution after the fact would be difficult in the extreme. The trail of evidence would have grown cold and money can buy many favours. Besides, where does this end? If this logic is applied to the prime minister, will we next have chief ministers demanding that their offices be kept out of the Lokpal Bill's purview because they too would be hobbled in governing their states