In News:

The Lokpal of India, established under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, was envisaged as an independent anti-corruption ombudsman capable of investigating complaints against high public officials, including the Prime Minister, Union Ministers, MPs and government officials.

Conceived in the backdrop of the 2011 anti-corruption movement, the institution began functioning meaningfully only in 2019, when the first Lokpal was constituted—marking a long-awaited step in strengthening mechanisms for integrity and transparency in governance.

Mandate and Powers

• The Lokpal is empowered to conduct inquiries and investigations under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
• Its jurisdiction extends to all public servants—Groups A to D—besides heads of government-funded institutions.
• It possesses quasi-judicial powers, including summoning witnesses, demanding documents, ordering asset freezes, and recommending prosecution.
• Crucially, it maintains supervisory authority over the CBI in cases referred by it, reinforcing independent and credible investigations.
• The Lokpal’s composition includes a Chairperson and up to eight members—half of them judicial. As of 2025, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar (retd.) serves as Chairperson, supported by a seven-member team. Members are appointed by the President upon the recommendation of a selection committee comprising the Prime Minister, Speaker of Lok Sabha, Leader of Opposition, Chief Justice of India, and an eminent jurist.

Performance Crisis and Data Trends

Despite its powerful mandate, the Lokpal’s performance has raised serious concerns. Since inception, it has received 6,955 complaints, yet only 289 preliminary inquiries have been ordered. Out of these, a mere seven cases have progressed to the prosecution stage—an alarming indicator of institutional underutilisation.

The declining public engagement is sharper still. Annual complaints peaked at 2,469 in 2022–23 but plummeted to 233 in 2025, suggesting fading public confidence. Nearly 90% of all complaints were received in its first four years (2019–2023), while the past three years recorded only 691 complaints combined.

Civil society groups have criticised the procedural rigidity of the Lokpal. Activists point out that many complaints are dismissed on technical grounds such as format errors, while substantive allegations remain unaddressed. Further, the Lokpal’s failure to upload annual reports since 2021–22 has generated questions about its transparency and accountability.

Institutional Weaknesses and Controversies

A major lacuna has been the delayed operationalisation of the prosecution wing, notified only in June 2025—twelve years after the enactment of the Lokpal Act—severely constraining its ability to pursue legal action. The credibility of the institution also came under public scrutiny when it issued a tender to procure seven BMW 330Li luxury cars for its Chairperson and members. Critics argue that an anti-corruption body must demonstrate fiscal restraint and ethical prudence in its own functioning.

Way Forward

Strengthening the Lokpal requires structural, procedural, and ethical reforms. A real-time digital dashboard should be created to enable public tracking of cases and reduce opacity. Complaint formats must be simplified to ensure accessibility for ordinary citizens. Institutional autonomy must be reinforced with adequate staffing for inquiry and prosecution wings. Annual reports should be mandatorily published and tabled in Parliament. Above all, Lokpal must cultivate public trust by adopting austerity and demonstrating moral credibility.

Conclusion

The Lokpal was created to be the custodian of public integrity—an independent safeguard against high-level corruption. However, its diminishing complaint inflow, administrative inertia, and controversies signal a crisis of legitimacy. Revitalising the institution through stronger transparency, greater accountability, and ethical restraint is essential if it is to fulfil its constitutional promise of clean and accountable governance.