There was a glimmer of hope among the general public when Justice Uma Nath Singh, former Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court, was made the first Lokayukta of Nagaland in 2019. It started on a promising note by taking some departments and agencies to task over delay in execution of development projects and questioning officials on usage of public funds but alas it was short-lived. The Lokayukta stepped down barely two years after assuming office amid disagreement with the government of Nagaland over the former’s insistence to function discreetly from the national capital, which the Supreme Court also questioned the possibility of. Now, former Chief Secretary of Nagaland, Banuo Z Jamir has filled this much-needed and vital post that is aimed at combating mal-administration, looking into the citizens’ grievances and exposing corrupt netas. It is a welcome move appointing a former bureaucrat from the state as the Lokayukta, as issues related to place of posting won’t arise if someone from the same state takes up the post. This body also can’t function discreetly as it investigates cases related to corruption. However, at the same time it will be quite a challenge for the statutory body to discharge its duties in a close-knit society like the Nagas where almost everyone is connected to each other and thus, the body must take upmost care to remain unprejudiced in the larger interest of the state.
For the anti-corruption institution to effectively perform it’s duty, the public has to respect the post and refrain from interfering in its functioning. If given the space and authority it requires, the Lokayukta along with the Income Tax Department and the Anti Corruption Bureau can work wonders in combating corruption and ensuring transparency in administration. The uncovering of the mining scam in Karnataka by its former Lokayukta Justice Santosh Hegde, which led to the imprisonment of the then chief minister in 2011, is a classic instance of how it can act as a powerful tool in fighting corruption. In the meantime, today, we hardly hear about the ombudsman exposing scams though almost all states have set up the body. This indicates that either it has become toothless or there is no corruption across the state. The latter is unlikely. The fact is that some states delay appointment of the official, while others try to defang it by curbing its powers. It is obvious that no government wants the Lokayukta to have the authority to investigate and indict public servants but the people stand to lose if the institution is reduced to a paper tiger. An empowered Lokayukta is the need of the hour and it is the responsibility of the government and people of the state to enable and support the office in executing its duties objectively and effectively.