Listing measures to insulate the CBI from external influences and intrusion,the Centre told the Supreme Court Wednesday that the CBI director would be appointed on the recommendation of a three-member panel headed by the Prime Minister and including the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India or a nominated judge for a period of not less than two years.
The government,in its affidavit,said the CBI director shall not be transferred without the consent of this selection committee. It also proposed that only the President would have the authority to remove or suspend the director,on a reference by the Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) of his misbehaviour or incapacity.
The affidavit,which will be considered by the SC on July 10,said while the CVC would have the power of superintendence and administration over the CBI for cases to be probed under the Prevention of Corruption Act,the Centre would be vested with the power in other matters.
While the Cabinet-approved amendments have not changed the minimum tenure guarantee for the CBI director the 2003 CVC Act also assured a minimum stint of two years the appointment procedure is set to see a major concession. The practice so far has been to appoint the director on the recommendation of a committee comprising the CVC,vigilance commissioners,MHA secretary in-charge,and secretary,coordination and public grievances. This committee has to take into consideration the views of the outgoing director and then recommend a panel of eligible IPS officers for appointment.
As per the suggested amendments to the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act,the Centre has sought to do away with the requirement to seek the outgoing directors views,and also wants the selection committee to recommend only one officer.
The affidavit,however,proposes an Accountability Commission,which will comprise three retired Supreme Court or High Court judges and will have all the powers of a civil court. The commission will be mandated to inquire into allegations of misbehaviour,impropriety etc against CBI officers,and may include the director under its purview.
The recommendation apparently goes beyond the courts poser on May 8,when a bench led by Justice R M Lodha had asked whether the central government intended to put in place appropriate law for the independence of the CBI and its functional autonomy and insulate it from extraneous influences of any kind… While the order mentioned the need to protect CBI from extraneous influences of the controlling executive,it did not seek views on any additional authority,apart from the CVC,to handle complaints against CBI officers.
The Centres affidavit also does not clearly spell out the financial powers of the director,merely stating that it shall be equivalent to the powers exercised by the CRPF director general at the relevant time.
The CBI has been under fire since its director Ranjit Sinha told the SC in May that then Law Minister Ashwani Kumar and senior officials from the Prime Ministers Office and Coal Ministry had amended a probe status report into the coal block allocation case before its submission. The SC had said it was perturbed by the CBI changing the heart of the report at the instance of its masters and remarked that it had become a caged parrot,speaking in its masters voice.
According to the affidavit,the CBIs Director of Prosecution (DoP),who is responsible for prosecution of CBI cases,will be appointed by the Centre on the recommendation of a selection committee headed by the CVC. The other members of the committee will be the DoPT secretary,home secretary and secretary of the department of legal affairs in the law ministry. The CBI director will be the member-convener of the committee.
The affidavit added that in case of a difference of opinion between the CBI director and DoP regarding prosecution in certain cases,the matter will be referred to the Attorney General. The director shall take the final decision,keeping in view the AGs opinion.