The CBI has told the government that it is vehemently opposed to at least five recommendations made by the parliamentary standing committee that examined the Lokpal bill. Among them:
* Making preliminary enquiry (PE) mandatory: It is understood to have pointed out that PE is part of CBIs internal mechanism,has no locus under the CrPC,and should not be made a non-dispensable necessity. In its written submission to government officials,CBI has said that a mandatory PE will help the accused by compromising witnesses and help in destroying evidence,since the element of surprise would be lost. CBI has suggested that the PE provision should be restricted to cases where there is no direct evidence of quid pro quo/criminality,as is the practice currently.
* Lokpals approval before chargesheet/closure: CBI has vehemently opposed the recommendation to amend Sec. 173 CrPC which empowers it to decide on the nature of the final report to be presented in court. A case-by-case approval from the Lokpal for filing chargesheets or closure reports would amount to interfering with the independence of the investigation,it has said. The agency has cited rulings by the Supreme Court to back its line.
* Deadline for completing investigation: CBI has opposed the standing committees recommendation that six months should be the appropriate investigation period. It has argued that fixing a timeframe might lead to legal complications,and that only the CBI chief is equipped to take a view on the requirements of a particular probe.
* Shifting the prosecution wing: The proposal to take the prosecution wing out of the agency has been pending with the government for years. The house panel has suggested that the prosecution wing be put under the general control of the Lokpal; CBI has argued that it must have its own prosecution unit in addition. Reason: its law officers provide critical inputs,and a prosecution wing is needed for cases registered under acts other than the Prevention of Corruption Act,and for non-Lokpal referred cases.