Regulations
Government moves bill to make bribe-giving an offence
Amid ruckus and disruptions in the Rajya Sabha, the government on Thursday moved a bill to amend the Prevention of Corruption Act making the giving of bribe also a crime along with receiving it.
 
The bill, introduced in the Rajya Sabha in 2013 and subsequently sent to a parliamentary panel, makes giving a bribe a specific offence.
 
It also covers retired public servants, but one controversial clause pertains to a provision requiring prior sanction to prosecute serving and former public officials.
 
"The government is committed to bring in more transparency and accountability in governance and to live by its pledge of maximum governance, minimum government," Minister of State in the Prime Minister's Office, Jitendra Singh, said while moving the bill.
 
"There are, in the amendments, certain measures which would disincentive bribe-giving and bring into the ambit of accountability and answerability the bribe-giver as well," he said.
 
"At the same time, it also envisages certain amendments that ensure that an honest and upright officer does not suffer from any intimidation or loss of initiative for which we are going to make certain amendments to enlarge the ambit of permission for initiating proceedings against an officer to all levels, regardless of his status, and similarly to also introduce procedure for seeking permission for prosecution of an officer even after he has superannuated," he said.
 
The bill, however, could not be taken up for discussion as the opposition created a ruckus, and said the bill cannot be discussed till the house was in order.

User

COMMENTS

Ralph Rau

2 years ago

If the government is serious about introducing such a bill it should be announced well in advance and put in the public domain for consultation.

The answer to prevention of corruption is TRANSPARENCY. Specifications should be standardised so that competition is only on rates and not on specifcations.Quotes should be visible on the web.

What about the role of agents and middlemen when bribes flow indirectly and not directly ?

Dahyabhai S Patel

2 years ago

Bribe giving must be an offence, but it must be considered offence for the bribe giver and the person supposed to take/who has taken bribe must be punished and made to pay as fine at least 100 times the amount of the bribe, as the government official is paid his salary from the people's tax for the work he is supposed to do faithfully and in time. In case of urgency, extra money should be paid officially, not as bribe!!!!

manoharlalsharma

2 years ago

Government moves bill to make bribe-giving an offence/I wish to ask through u r organisation then what will u do in NEED of an URGENCY will u die or to PAY & SAVE U R LIFE ? and if u complain to any of the CENTRAL/STATE department u will have find FIRST IRRESPONSIBLE BABUS because NO CM or PM have time to devote in u r difficult time.

Dahyabhai S Patel

2 years ago

Further, there must be a well displayed procedure for applying for any service along with documents to be supplied (there must be no need of wasting papers for the documents as attachments/enclosures which are already with government; reference must be sufficient ) and time taken for the job to be completed.The applicant must be helped to file it properly and the document asked must be delivered at applicant's address by post saving time and fuel for transport conveyance. If the job is not done in time, the official must be severely punished and pay from his pocket.

Dahyabhai S Patel

2 years ago

I do not know exactly about the bill. The law must be enacted such that if any government official asks for the bribe or does not do his duty or prolong the job in order to extract money as bribe from Aam Aadmi, he must be punished, rather fired from his services. No body likes to give bribe. If asked for the bribe, it must be sufficient for Aam Aadmi to complaint about the official and onus of proving the complaint must be on government office bearer. If it is proved against Aam Aadmi, the latter must be punished to maximum,

IRDAI finds Sahara Life promoters 'fit and proper'
The criteria whether the promoter(s) are 'fit and proper' is one of the fundamental criteria while licensing an insurance company
 
India's insurance regulator has not come across any concern relating to Sahara Life Insurance Company Ltd even though SEBI has cancelled the licence of Sahara Mutual Fund on the ground its promoters are not 'fit and proper' to run the mutual fund business.
 
"We have not come across any concern relating to Sahara Life. It is a small company in the life insurance sector. The company's expenses are within limit," T.S.Vijayan, chairman, Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI), told IANS on the phone on Thursday.
 
When it was pointed out that Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) action against Sahara Mutual Fund was on the grounds that the promoters are not 'fit and proper' Vijayan said: "We have not come across any issue about Sahara Life."
 
On July 28, India's securities market regulator ordered cancellation of certificate of registration of Sahara Mutual Fund as it found the fund house, Sahara Asset Management Company (AMC) and Sahara Sponsor not "fit and proper" to carry on the business.
 
According to a the market's regulator's statement, its whole-time member Prashant Saran passed the order as Sahara Mutual Fund along with Sahara AMC and Sahara Sponsor were found to be no longer "fit and proper" to carry out the business of Mutual Fund.
 
However insurance industry experts differ from Vijayan's views.
 
The criteria whether the promoter(s) are "fit and proper" is one of the fundamental criteria while licensing an insurance company.
 
"SEBI cancelling the licence of a mutual fund on 'fit and proper' grounds should ring alarm bells in other financial regulators," D.Varadarajan, a Supreme Court advocate and expert in insurance, company, competition law, told IANS.
 
According to him life insurance contract is of longer duration and is a business of promise to pay the nominee the sum assured in the event of death of the policyholder.
 
On the other hand mutual fund investment is generally is of short/medium term duration.
 
Insurance officials are of the view that solvency, management expenses are operational issues whereas 'fit and proper' criteria is more fundamental aspect.
 
A retired senior official of IRDAI too expressed similar views to IANS and added: "Insurance regulator should at least review Sahara Life Insurance's operations."

User

COMMENTS

Nitish Yadav

2 years ago

Sahara is surely fit and proper. The way SEBI is taking harsh actions against Sahara are really unnecessary.

Ritwik Patel

2 years ago

This is really the truth. SEBI is unnecessarily defaming Sahara Group. This is a hard time for Sahara but, the truth will win at last as always.

Ritwik Patel

2 years ago

Sahara Group worked for the betterment of people in India. They Subroto Roy and Sahara stood up always whenever the nation wanted help. I wish the truth comes before everyone just like IRDAI and everyone comes to know how much 'fit and proper' Sahara is.

Rajat Chauhan

2 years ago

There have been false allegations on Sahara. Finally an organization that comes up with genuine and true reviews about Sahara Group. I wish the world sees the truth about Sahara and Saharasri.

integrity

2 years ago

Had not a ROC given clearance to now adjudicated illegal two sahara firms ?

manoharlalsharma

2 years ago

the life insurance is the business/contract is of longer duration and is a business of promise to pay the nominee the sum assured in the event of death of the policyholder only it is the CATCH who want to die himself so the INSOLVENT countries attracted our country.once upon CLOSED COMPNYS again open

Gunasekaran

2 years ago

THE PRESENT SET UP OF IRADAI LOOKS IRDAI IS OF, BY AND FOR INSURERS AND NOT FOR INSURED - THE POOR INDIAN CITIZENS - THEY SEND THE GRIEVANCES TO THE DUSTBIN EVEN WITHOUT ACKNOWLEDGING IT. SORRY TO STATE THAT WHAT KIND OF REGULATOR ARE.

REPLY

MOHAN SIROYA

In Reply to Gunasekaran 2 years ago

Right Gunasekaran, IRDAI is not a Regulator but a Manipulator. Name sake Regulators alias paper Tigers are plenty in India, who only see what is good for the Insurer but not for the Insured. But why blame them? Blame the lawmakers who made such faulty laws under which such Regulators take shelter and thrive. Their job is not Regulating but DEVELOPING .Means and methods ,even if crooks are involved in Development ,are not their concern.

Harshad Kamdar

2 years ago

IRDAI is making itself a laughing
stock after several remarks of the Supreme Court against the jailed Sahara chairman.

How can we trust our hard earned savings to such Insurer whose future hangs in the balance

Harshad Kamdar

2 years ago

IRDAI is making itself a laughing
stock after several remarks of the Supreme Court against the jailed Sahara chairman.

How can we trust our hard earned savings to such Insurer whose future hangs in the balance

Sunil Rebello

2 years ago

SEBI & IRDA are behaving like all government departments.
see what is happening with SUN TV.
see what is happening with Aviation Ministry.
and so many other items.
why cant all wait for Supreme Court to guide.
justice delayed is justice denied - pray that our SC & other courts improves serving the people in need of justice.


R S Murthy

2 years ago

Shara Life promoters may be fit but the policy holders may become misfit in due course. I heard one senior professional banker who is no more now commented long back Industries become sick but not Industrialists

Your loan would be routed through Facebook!
Your loan approval will now depend on your Facebook friends -- thanks to a new patent that the social networking giant has recently secured.
 
The new feature would allow lenders to use the borrower's social habits to determine approval of credit.
 
The patent explains that if one applies for a loan, the lender could potentially check out the credit rating of your Facebook friends, The Next Web reported.
 
The average credit rating of your friends collectively needs to be at least a minimum credit score for the loan to be approved.
 
Does this mean that you would have to "unfriend" all those people who are in debt, or have failed to repay their EMIs on time? But how would one know about the credit history of their friends?
 
Experts say there is no reason to lose your sleep over it just yet as Facebook has not made it clear how this patent would be used. Besides, there are laws in place that determine the criteria that lenders can use when deciding your credit worthiness.

User

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine)