LOBBYISTS are in the news for all the wrong reasons. The tragic killings, just outside Tucson, Arizona, on Jan 8, of a federal judge, a 9-year-old girl and four others, and the serious wounding of Congresswoman Gabrielle Gifford's, drew attention to the liberal gun laws in the United States.
But efforts to impose reasonable limits on gun ownership were defeated by one of the country’s most powerful lobbyist organizations, the National Rifle Association. It is equaled in power and influence on policy only by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
Last year, India’s media and politicians were shaken by the news of corporate lobbyist Niira Radia. She acquired a huge fortune in less than a decade and counts industrialists such as Ratan Tata and Mukesh Ambani among her clients. What disturbed people the most were her frantic exertions during the cabinet formation to secure her favourite a portfolio which would help her and her clients. A sweeping condemnation of lobbying would be wrong. As Zubeida Mustafa pointed out in a very cogently argued article ‘The anatomy of advocacy’ published in this newspaper on Dec 21, we need human rights activists to take up causes, argue them with facts and figures and pursue their cause. “In a country where social injustice is rampant, democratic traditions are weak, illiteracy rates are high, intolerance is common and the rule of law virtually absent, no disadvantaged section of society can take it for granted that it will get its rights in due course and must depend on advocacy and lobbying to move its cause forward, bringing it to the attention of lawmakers, the judiciary and administration,” she wrote.
However, Ms Mustafa deplores the American model which “carries it to the extreme by reducing it to a financial transaction”. Not just in the US but also in Europe and in many Third World countries, the presence of the professional lobbyist who peddles influence for a fee is a reality. As economies grow and the role of the state expands, so will the opportunities for the lobbyist. Ms Radia’s success reveals how far lobbyists can go.
Where, then, do we draw the line? The problem must be faced realistically and a solution devised effectively. The lobbyist needs partners in the media and among legislators and ministers. Members of parliament are generally contacted by lobbyists. To acquire contacts they enlist the services of eminent personalities in the media who would enjoy the necessary range and ease of access.
It is for representative professional bodies of the media themselves — certainly not for the state — to formulate a code of conduct and appoint its monitors. The British Press Complaints Commission adjudicates on complaints of violations of a code of conduct drafted by editors of eminence.
The House of Commons has a Register of Members’ Interests with a registrar who not only compiles data but also receives complaints from the public. Nine classes of pecuniary interests are required to be disclosed. They are wide enough to include payments received from lobbyists. They include remunerated directorship of companies, public or private, remunerated employments or offices, remunerated trades, professions or vocations, the names of clients when the interests include personal services by the member which arise out of or are related in any manner to his membership of the house, and much else besides.
There is a code of conduct for MPs which prohibits paid advocacy on behalf of outside bodies. An independent Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards monitors the operation of the code. But by far the greatest check on breaches of rules or improprieties by paid lobbyists is the vigilance of highly specialized business correspondents. Transparency is the best safeguard against abuses in public life, whether in politics, commerce or industry. Legislation can ensure transparency by imposing on lobbyists a duty to register themselves. The register will, of course, be open to public scrutiny.
Under Section 4 of the US Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, every lobbyist or his employer must register with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives. As well as details about himself and his area of work, he is required to disclose the identity of his client “and a general description of its business or activities”.
Lobbying is here to stay and such work is certain to attract increasing attention. Now is the time to consider what legislation to enact to prevent or curb the excesses or improprieties by lobbyists. The Third World is particularly vulnerable.
But efforts to impose reasonable limits on gun ownership were defeated by one of the country’s most powerful lobbyist organizations, the National Rifle Association. It is equaled in power and influence on policy only by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
Last year, India’s media and politicians were shaken by the news of corporate lobbyist Niira Radia. She acquired a huge fortune in less than a decade and counts industrialists such as Ratan Tata and Mukesh Ambani among her clients. What disturbed people the most were her frantic exertions during the cabinet formation to secure her favourite a portfolio which would help her and her clients. A sweeping condemnation of lobbying would be wrong. As Zubeida Mustafa pointed out in a very cogently argued article ‘The anatomy of advocacy’ published in this newspaper on Dec 21, we need human rights activists to take up causes, argue them with facts and figures and pursue their cause. “In a country where social injustice is rampant, democratic traditions are weak, illiteracy rates are high, intolerance is common and the rule of law virtually absent, no disadvantaged section of society can take it for granted that it will get its rights in due course and must depend on advocacy and lobbying to move its cause forward, bringing it to the attention of lawmakers, the judiciary and administration,” she wrote.
However, Ms Mustafa deplores the American model which “carries it to the extreme by reducing it to a financial transaction”. Not just in the US but also in Europe and in many Third World countries, the presence of the professional lobbyist who peddles influence for a fee is a reality. As economies grow and the role of the state expands, so will the opportunities for the lobbyist. Ms Radia’s success reveals how far lobbyists can go.
Where, then, do we draw the line? The problem must be faced realistically and a solution devised effectively. The lobbyist needs partners in the media and among legislators and ministers. Members of parliament are generally contacted by lobbyists. To acquire contacts they enlist the services of eminent personalities in the media who would enjoy the necessary range and ease of access.
It is for representative professional bodies of the media themselves — certainly not for the state — to formulate a code of conduct and appoint its monitors. The British Press Complaints Commission adjudicates on complaints of violations of a code of conduct drafted by editors of eminence.
The House of Commons has a Register of Members’ Interests with a registrar who not only compiles data but also receives complaints from the public. Nine classes of pecuniary interests are required to be disclosed. They are wide enough to include payments received from lobbyists. They include remunerated directorship of companies, public or private, remunerated employments or offices, remunerated trades, professions or vocations, the names of clients when the interests include personal services by the member which arise out of or are related in any manner to his membership of the house, and much else besides.
There is a code of conduct for MPs which prohibits paid advocacy on behalf of outside bodies. An independent Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards monitors the operation of the code. But by far the greatest check on breaches of rules or improprieties by paid lobbyists is the vigilance of highly specialized business correspondents. Transparency is the best safeguard against abuses in public life, whether in politics, commerce or industry. Legislation can ensure transparency by imposing on lobbyists a duty to register themselves. The register will, of course, be open to public scrutiny.
Under Section 4 of the US Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, every lobbyist or his employer must register with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives. As well as details about himself and his area of work, he is required to disclose the identity of his client “and a general description of its business or activities”.
Lobbying is here to stay and such work is certain to attract increasing attention. Now is the time to consider what legislation to enact to prevent or curb the excesses or improprieties by lobbyists. The Third World is particularly vulnerable.
By A. G. Noorani
No comments:
Post a Comment