BMW row proves Lokpal’s lofty goals remain unmet: Anti-graft activist | Capital Beat

The Lokpal recently courted a massive controversy over the floating of a tender to procure seven high-end BMW cars with a collective worth of Rs 5 crore.

The move by the anti-corruption ombudsman has invited severe criticism from several quarters, with political parties demanding an explanation for the need to spend taxpayers’ money on the luxuries and fancies of Lokpal members.

In this episode of Capital Beat, social activist and anti-corruption campaigner Nikhil Dey discusses the controversy, the Lokpal’s efficacy in tackling corruption and what it means for India’s anti-corruption framework.

What is your reaction to the Lokpal’s BMW tender?

The BMW tender is really just a trigger. The Lokpal has not performed well, as highlighted by the Parliamentary Standing Committee and activists nationwide. Most of their disposals are technical, with very few cases investigated substantively. From 2013 to 2019, no appointments were made, and even after the Lokpal was constituted, the rules regarding asset disclosures for public servants were weakened. Adding BMWs on top of this only adds salt to the wound. The Lokpal should have led by example, showing restraint and integrity. Public institutions need to set a moral benchmark, and luxury cars undermine that.

Also read: Amitabh Kant opts for Mahindra XEV9, urges Lokpal to drop BMWs and go local

Is the Lokpal still necessary despite these shortcomings?

The Lokpal is absolutely needed. It was created to address political corruption and corruption among public servants in high places. The problem lies in its implementation. Appointments were delayed, and those appointed have failed to act decisively. If the Lokpal were functioning properly, it would have pursued corruption cases impartially. But instead, it has become a symbol of inaction, with the BMW issue highlighting the lost moral high ground.

How would you evaluate the Lokpal’s performance so far?

The performance has been terrible. Despite high hopes, the institution has failed to prosecute corruption effectively. Many complaints are dismissed on technical grounds, leaving citizens with no hope of fair investigation.

The Lokpal’s role is to proactively support citizens in reporting corruption, but it has failed to do so. Its lofty objectives remain unmet, and public trust has eroded. The BMW tender brings this failure into sharper focus—it’s not just about expenditure, it’s about missed opportunity to uphold credibility.

Also read: BMW row | Lokpal hasn’t started to fly; complaints mostly ignored: Venkatesan

Some argue Lokpal officials are entitled to luxury cars similar to Supreme Court judges. How do you see this?

I wouldn’t call it a brazen display of extravagance, but rather a lost opportunity to maintain moral authority. Even Supreme Court judges having luxury vehicles is debatable. The Lokpal should have led by example, showing restraint in a country with significant poverty and misuse of public funds. The budget allows them to function efficiently without indulging in luxury. The message being sent is that the focus is on perks rather than performance.

How can the Lokpal be held accountable?

Unfortunately, within the current law, there’s no direct mechanism for accountability. Public debate, parliamentary standing committee evaluations, and media scrutiny are key. We must pressure the government to ensure that appointments are transparent and merit-based. Independent commissions, whether Lokpal, Election Commission, or Information Commission, need the right people and evaluation mechanisms. Otherwise, the very purpose of these institutions is compromised.

Also read: Opposition slams Lokpal calling it 'Shauq Pal' over Rs 5-crore BMW car tender

What would be the right course of action regarding the BMW tender?

The tender could be withdrawn, and that should happen. But withdrawing it alone doesn’t solve the larger issue. The Lokpal must become proactive, reach out to citizens, encourage complaints, and act impartially. Accountability is not just about withdrawing a tender—it’s about ensuring the institution fulfills its mandate effectively. Until then, the focus will remain on symbolic issues like the BMWs rather than substantive anti-corruption work.

The content above has been transcribed from video using a fine-tuned AI model. To ensure accuracy, quality, and editorial integrity, we employ a Human-In-The-Loop (HITL) process. While AI assists in creating the initial draft, our experienced editorial team carefully reviews, edits, and refines the content before publication. At The Federal, we combine the efficiency of AI with the expertise of human editors to deliver reliable and insightful journalism.