SC orders Government to Protect whistleblowers who expose corruption

SC orders Government to Protect whistleblowers who expose corruption

Year 2003 –

Indian Engineering Service officer Satyendra Dubey was killed after he exposed corruption in the Golden Quadrilateral highway construction project in 2003.

After his murder a PIL was filed by an NGO -Parivartan-- seeking its direction for an effective whistleblowers' protection programme.

Still there is nothing on ground and in reality.

January 6, 2016 -
Supreme Court of India ordered the government of India to place in an administrative mechanism for the protection of whistleblowers as they face threats and harassment for exposing corruption in government departments
a bench of Chief Justice T S Thakur and Justices A K Sikri and R Banumathi said there was "absolute vacuum" which could not be allowed to go on.
the bench said the government could not turn a blind eye to the need for their protection and directed the Centre to spell out within a week the steps it intended to take for their protection.
Take a firm stand on the time-frame within which you will bring administrative set-up to protect whistleblowers.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan submitted that the Centre had enacted the whistleblower Act but had not notified it
Further he told to court that CVC was merely forwarding whistleblower complaints to Chief Vigilance Officers who were middle level officers in the ministries, as they could not hold a proper inquiry against superior officials facing complaints of corruption or other irregularities. Further, CVOs held the post for three years and were sent back after this to work under the same officials whom they had probed.

The bench had earlier made it clear that the CVC should not send every whistleblower complaint to the Chief Vigilance Officer (CVO) of the concerned ministries/departments behaving like a post office.

Attorney General sought three months’ time to seek instructions from the Government, the CJI observed “whistle blower is a phenomena and they will continue to do it. Take firm instructions. If you are unable to come up with any steps, then we can pass orders.

The bench asked the A-G to spell out the government’s stand on January 13, 2016

On the next date of hearing, 13 January, attorney general Mukul Rohatgi will give the court a time-frame for plugging the gaps in the administrative process which the government laid down in a 21 April 2004 notification—the Public Interest Disclosure and Protection of Informer resolution.

Reality views by sm –

Thursday, January 7, 2016

Tags – whistleblowers protection law