ONGC WHISTLE BLOWER SETHEE

 K.K. SETHEE,
Superintending Engineer (Electronics & Telecom), ID no. 34113, ONGC Limited, 20-6-2006, Petitioner in writ petition (lodging) no. 1167 of 2006, Bombay High Court. Residential address for communications, C 1/ 23, ONGC COLONY, BANDRA RECLAMATION, BANDRA (WEST), MUMBAI-400050,

email: kksethee@gmail.com, skk2000skk@yahoo.co.in,

mobile no. 9821234760.

Recent Outbound Links

Recent links from ONGC WHISTLE BLOWER OFFICER part 2.

• View my complete profile

  7 days ago

• skk2000skk@yahoo.co.in

  7 days ago

ONGC WHISTLE BLOWER OFFICER PART 2 in CONTINUIATION OF LAST POSTING

http://kks2000kks-2.blogspot.com/2006/06/ongc-whistle-blower-officer-part-2-in.html

ONGC WHISTLE BLOWER OFFICER PART 3 IN CONTINUATION OF PART 2

http://kks2000kks-3.blogspot.com/2006/06/ongc-whistle-blower-officer-part-3-in.html

Manjunath trial: Two witnesses turn hostile

Manjunath trial: Two witnesses turn hostile
 
Express News Service

http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=191653
 
Lakhimpur Kheri, July 6: Two prosecution witnesses in the S Manjunath murder trial turned hostile today, retracting the statements that they had earlier made before the police.

One of them, Rajendra Singh, denied that he had heard gun shots on the night of November 19 last year, when Manjunath was shot dead. Rajendra’s house is next to the petrol pump were Manjunath was allegedly killed. He was cross-examined by the District Government Counsel, Chandra Mohan Singh.

The other witness who turned hostile today was Balwinder. However, prosecution lawyers claimed that they had successfully extracted the evidence from both the witnesses.The third prosecution witness who was produced today was R P Pandey, an employee of a hotel in Gola Gokarn, Alankar Hotel. He told the court that Manjunath had stayed in the hotel on the night of November 18. He said the victim had checked out of the hotel the next day, at about 10:30 am. He handed over hotel records to support his statement.

‘‘Pandey’s statement is an important evidence to prove Manjunath’s presence at Gola Gokarn on the day of his murder,’’ said I B Singh, one of the lawyers on the prosecution team.

S Manjunath, a sales executive with Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), was shot dead in Lakhimpur Kheri on November 19 last year. He had reportedly threatened to seal a petrol pump, Mittal Automobiles, at Gola Gokarn in Lakhimpur Kheri, for selling adulterated fuel.

The main accused is Monu Mittal, the son of the petrol pump owner. Police had earlier recovered empty cartridges from the petrol pump area. The others accused in the case are Harish, Rakesh Kumar, Vivek Sharma, Lalla Giri, Rajesh Verma, Devesh Agnihotri and Sanjay Awasthi.

Wipro to introduce `Whistle Blower Policy’

Wipro to introduce `Whistle Blower Policy’

The company has already adopted an Ombudsprocess policy wherein it has established procedures for receiving, retaining and treating complaints received

Srinivas R

Monday, June 26, 2006

http://www.ciol.com/content/search/showarticle.asp?arid=85666&way=search

BANGALORE: Wipro Ltd is looking at strengthening its Ombudsprocess by introducing new Whistle Blower Policy. This will enable employees to raise their concerns about any malpractice, impropriety, abuse or wrongdoing at an early stage without fear of victimisation, subsequent discrimination or disadvantage.

Disclosing this in the SEC filing, the company said that it may establish a mechanism for employees to report to the management concerns about unethical behavior, actual or suspected fraud or violation of the company’s code of conduct or ethics policy. This mechanism could also provide for adequate safeguards against victimisation of employees who avail of the mechanism and also provide for direct access to the chairman of the audit committee in exceptional cases. Once established, the existence of the mechanism may be appropriately communicated within the organisation.

“The company has adopted an Ombudsprocess policy wherein it has established procedures for receiving, retaining and treating complaints received, and procedures for the confidential and anonymous submission by employees of complaints regarding possible violations of the code of conduct and ethics,” said company filings.

Under this policy, Wipro employees are encouraged to report questionable accounting matters, any reporting of fraudulent financial or other information to the stakeholders, any conduct that results in violation of the company’s code of business conduct and ethics, to management (on an anonymous basis, if employees so desire). Likewise, under this policy, the company has prohibited discrimination, retaliation or harassment of any kind against any employees who, based on the employee’s reasonable belief that such conduct or practice have occurred or are occurring, reports that information or participates in the investigation. “No personnel of the company has been denied access to the audit committee or its chairman,” said the company.

© CyberMedia News

Whistleblower’s wife assaulted; no case registered

Whistleblower’s wife assaulted; no case registered
Pradeep Sharma
Tribune News Service  http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20060707/cth1.htm#3Zirakpur, July 6
The wife of Mr K.D. Bakshi, a retired IAF official, who blew the lid off blocking of a nullah passing through Vikas Nagar located along the Zirakpur-Kalka highway by certain persons, was allegedly assaulted by at least 10 persons this morning.

Ms Chandra Kanta Bakshi (60) was pushed around and abused by the assailants around 11.30 am when she was alone at her home. “Hurling abuses, they barged into the house and caught hold of my hair. However, when I raised the alarm, they fled seeing people gathering at my house,” said a visibly upset Ms Chandra Kanta. Mr Bakshi was away to Yamunanagar on a personal visit.

The assailants, it seemed, were angered by Mr Bakshi’s complaint to the Zirakpur Nagar Panchayat that certain residents of the area had blocked the natural flow of the nullah. The blockage of the nullah would prove to be detrimental to the houses during the monsoon, it was feared in the representation by Mr Bakshi.

Acting on the complaint of Mr Bakshi, the civic body staff today cleared the nullah by removing encroachments on public land, Mr Narinder Sharma, nagar panchayat president, said.

The blockade of the natural flow of the nullah was viewed seriously by the civic body following which the civic body initiated the action, he added. This action of the municipality seemed to led to the assault on Ms Bakshi by the assailants.

The Bakshis live alone at their house here. Their son, Maj V.K. Bakshi, who is posted at Nasik, told Chandigarh Tribune over the telephone that the attack on his mother was a serious matter and the police should pursue the case to its logical conclusion.

“In fact, my father had acted in public interest and if whistleblowers are targeted by anti-social elements in this manner, then no right-thinking person would come forward to expose their wrongdoings,” he said, demanding police protection for his family.

Meanwhile, the Dera Bassi DSP, Mr Varinder Brar, while promising action against the guilty, said the police was investigating the matter. However, no case has been registered yet.

A whistleblower’s dilemma – The identity of those who expose corruption might be revealed under the Right to Information Act

A whistleblower’s dilemma

The identity of those who expose corruption might be revealed under the Right to Information Act

N Vittal

http://www.mumbaimirror.com/nmirror/mmpaper.asp?sectid=14&articleid=72200621335203722006213239234

Corruption is the cancer of public life today. There is a universal growing recognition that corruption is anti-economic development, anti-poor and anti-national.

At last there are some systematic efforts being made to tackle the issue of corruption. The directive by the Supreme Court that candidates standing for election will have to declare details of their criminal record, their wealth and educational qualification has injected an element of transparency in public life. The passing of the Right to Information Act  is hailed as a major step to empowering civil society and making the government more accountable.

Sunshine is the antidote for corruption and the more transparent public organisations become, there will be lesser scope for corruption.

Equally important is the role played by

people within a corrupt organisation in exposing corruption. These people are taking a great risk by exposing corruption in their organisations. Satyendra Dubey’s name flashes to mind readily. He was a sincere whistleblower in the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and had to pay a heavy price — his life.

This moved the Supreme Court to issue a directive to the CVC saying that action must be taken to protect whistleblowers.

In fact, when I was CVC, I moved the Law Commission of India to draft a Whistleblowers’ Act, which was ultimately called the Public Disclosure (Protection of Whistleblowers) Bill. Since 2002, when I left office, this bill is pending as the government has not yet made a decision.

Whistleblowers normally face a lot of problems in their careers. By exposing corruption among their superiors, they face the possibility of direct or indirect punishment. This could be in the form of lack of advancement and promotions ultimately leading to their careers failing.

The Whistleblowers’ Act at least protects the career interest of the whistleblowers and their identity. But a more important issue is the risk whistleblowers face in terms of physical harm. There is no provision for providing physical protection to them. That is the first part of the dilemma which whistleblowers in our country face.

The second aspect of the dilemma faced by whistleblowers is paradoxically because of the Right to Information Act! I recently learnt about an employee of a government of India public sector enterprise who tried to expose corruption amongst his superiors. He approached the chief vigilance officer of the organisation. The vigilance officer told him that while he may initiate action on his complaint, his identity as a whistleblower could not be protected because this may have to be revealed under the provisions of the Right to Information Act.

Here we see a classic example of the path to hell being paved with good intentions. In the case of whistleblowers who expose cases of corruption, should their identity also be revealed under the Right to Information Act? The only advice I can give is that the whistleblower should approach the CVC directly and make his case. CVC is under the Supreme Court’s directive to protect the identity of whistleblowers thanks to the tragic case of Satyendra Dubey.

But how many will be able to approach the CVC? This is the dilemma which every whistleblower in the country today faces. If we really want to make a breakthrough in tackling corruption and at the same time get the full benefits of both the Whistleblowers’ Act as well as the Right to Information Act, a practical solution will have to be found.

The simple solution would be to make a provision in the Right to Information Act

itself that the identity of whistleblowers will not be  revealed under the Act. This is definitely a problem that can be resolved. Where there is a will there is a way. Do we have the will to fight corruption?

•  In the last decade, N Vittal, the former CVC emerged as the voice of our collective conscience. This is his weekly take on public life in India

Dubey may yet inspire Indian whistleblowers

 http://www.goodnewsindia.com/Pages/support/services/printVersion/184_0_2_0

After all, Satyendra Dubey may not have died in vain. His death was neither the first, nor will be the last that vested interests will perpetrate, but Dubey's death uniquely galvanised nation-wide protest. That he was an alumnus of IIT mattered. IIT-ians across the world demanded action. Now at last, India has taken the first tentative step towards a full-fledged law to protect whistleblowers.
There is no occasion to celebrate any political sagacity or remorse that might have caused this development. It did not. The government –one with those around the world– had to be dragged every inch of the way by angry public opinion. The Supreme Court did considerable prodding. The Hon'ble Court was acting on two public interest litigations seeking a permanent mechanism to protect whistleblowers.
Finally on April 21, the Ministry of Personnel issued a notification granting immunity to all employees of the government except those in armed and intelligence services. For the moment, the protector of whistleblowers will be the statutory office of the Central Vigilance Commissioner. He is vested with the responsibility of protecting the identity of informants, follow-up on information received, investigate if thought fit, and initiate criminal proceedings if required. Once the on-going general elections are over, the new government is expected to apply its mind in framing a bill to supercede the current notification. A robust law is however, some years away.
India is about to join an elite club of just four democracies [USA, UK, Australia and New Zealand] which have whistleblower protection. These democracies have not had these laws in place for too long. The US had its law in place only in 1989 and the other countries have followed after that.
K Ashok Vardhan Shetty has written a fine review [in the Hindu] of the role whistleblowers have played in improving transparency in governments. He suggests that Daniel Ellsberg of the USA would easily be the patron saint of modern day whistleblowers. In 1971, Ellsberg released the so-called Pentagon Papers that blew the cover of successive US governments that went about creating the mess called the Vietnam War. Ellsberg was a war veteran and later as an analyst at Rand Corporation had access to sensitive, classified documents. Stung by his conscience Ellsberg leaked these to the public.

He had to pay a heavy price, recounts Shetty: "The U.S. Government responded by prosecuting Ellsberg on 12 charges, leading to a total sentence of 115 years if convicted. That was not all. The dirty tricks department at the Nixon White House launched a smear campaign against Ellsberg; engaged the Watergate burglars to break into his psychiatrist's office in the hope of finding something defamatory; tapped his telephones; engaged thugs to physically attack him; and tried to influence the trial judge with the offer of the post of FBI Director. When these plots were exposed, the judge had to abandon the trial and acquit Ellsberg. Nixon's machinations against Ellsberg formed the basis of two of the three articles of impeachment against him."
The purpose of this rather long-winded narration of what happened to Ellsberg, is to give heart to Indians. All this happened just some 30 years ago in a USA that today stands on high moral ground and lectures the world. A 50 year-old Indian democracy need not despair too much. There is already a right to information law in place. Between that, and an emerging whistleblower law, citizens may hope for greater accountability and better governance in India.
Shetty in his fine article says both laws work best in tandem. He says that with the right to information act, 'Users would have to specify what they wanted to know. But where there is no reason to suspect that something is amiss, no one may bother to ask.' But whistleblowers could pre-empt disasters. He says,'Without whistleblowers, we may not get to learn about problems until it is time to mourn the consequences.' A great responsibility is therefore, about to devolve on individual Indians. We are notorious for pointing fingers, plead helplessness and acquire a collective alibi for 'us ordinary, powerless people'. Indians must now quit this hand-wringing and organise themselves into groups and enter an activist mode.
The pensive gaze on Dubey's face may not be one of satisfaction due to the fact that he was appreciatively mentioned in the government notification cited in the beginning. He may in fact be beseeching you and me to stop grumbling, complaining and start acting.

Reference:As cited

Government informs court of steps to protect whistleblowers

Government informs court of steps to protect

whistleblowers

By Indo-Asian News Service – Monday April 26, 6:30 PM

http://in.news.yahoo.com/040426/43/2crrd.html

aval said India had thus become the fifth country in the world after Britain, the US, Australia and New Zealand to have a law protecting whistleblowers.

On the direction of the apex court, Raval had framed a scheme for protecting whistleblowers as an interim measure before parliament took up a bill in this regard. After the court approved this scheme, the government notified it through a resolution.

Raval said under this resolution, complaints or disclosure of any allegation of corruption or of misuse of office by any employee of the central government or of any corporation, government companies, societies or local authorities could be received by the CVC.

The resolution, while making the leakage of the name of a whistleblower an offence, had given power to the CVC to conduct preliminary inquiries into the complaints and to initiate proceedings against the government servants.

The court was hearing a petition from advocate Rakesh Upadhyay, who sought a direction to the government to evolve a system as recommended by the constitution review committee in 2002 to protect people complaining about corruption and to keep the complainant's name secret.

Upadhyay had also asked the court to order a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation into the murder of engineer Satyendra Dubey, who was killed shortly after he complained last year to the Prime Minister's Office about corruption in a prestigious national highways project.

After receiving complaints, the CVC could either conduct a discreet enquiry or officially seek comments or explanation from the head of the government department concerned.

While doing so, the CVC should not disclose the identity of the informant and also request the head of the government organisation to keep the identity of the informant secret.

After receiving the report from the government, the CVC shall order appropriate proceedings to be initiated against the government employee concerned and administrative steps for redressing the loss caused to the government as a result of the corruption or misuse of office.

The court asked the government to give adequate publicity to the resolution in English and vernacular newspapers and adjourned proceedings in the case till July.

India fifth country to have whistleblowers law

India fifth country to have whistleblowers law

NEW DELHI, DHNS:
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/apr272004/n6.asp

India became the fifth country after UK, USA, Australia and New Zealand to have a law to protect whistleblowers who give information on corruption in public life, Solicitor General Kirit N Raval told the Supreme Court on Monday.

Appearing in the matter pertaining to the murder of Satyendra Dubey, a whistle blower, Mr Raval said that the Ministry of Personnel notified a resolution on April 21 empowering the Chief Vigilance Commission (CVC) as the designated agency to receive all complaints alleging corruption in public life pertaining to the Central Government.

On the direction of the apex court, Mr Raval had framed the guidelines for the protection of whistleblowers as an interim measure before Parliament took up a Bill in this regard. After minor modification, the Centre has accepted the guidelines leading to its notification in the form of a resolution.

The notification made the leakage of the name of the whistle blower an offence and gave power to the CVC to conduct preliminary inquiry into the complaint and initiate appropriate proceedings against the government employees. For this the CVC will devise an appropriate machinery, the notification said.

After making discreet inquiries on a complaint, if the CVC thinks that the matter requires further investigation, it can seek comments or explanation from the Head of the department or organisation concerned. If allegation of misuse of office is substantiated, the CVC shall assess the loss caused to the government, recommend initiation of criminal proceedings against the culprits and corrective measures to prevent recurrence of such events, the notification said.

The CVC may seek the assistance of CBI or local police to complete the investigation. If the complainant is victimised, the CVC would provide protection to him or her. If the complainant is motivated or vexatious, the CVC shall be at liberty to take appropriate steps.

Protect whistleblowers

Protect whistleblowers

There is need for legislation to protect those who expose misdeeds.

http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/nov252005/ editpage15262820051124.asp

Yet another person has paid with his life for speaking up against corruption. Manjunath Shanmugam, a young manager with Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) and an IIM graduate, was shot dead on November 19 for drawing attention to irregularities in the quality of fuel being marketed in some petrol pumps. Manjunath had ordered the closure of an IOC petrol pump in Lakhimpur Kheri in UP for selling adulterated fuel. Samples of fuel from the pump indicated adulteration. It appears that the owners of the petrol pump decided to act before more of their illegal activities were exposed. They had him shot dead. Manjunath is said to have ordered the shut down of two other IOC dealer’s petrol pumps in Lakhimpur for adulteration of fuel. The IOC has demanded security for its employees. It appears that employees of fuel marketing companies in the country are having to battle a fuel adulteration mafia that presides over a multi-crore business. Those who simply do their duty and speak up against adulteration are living in terror. Some like Manjunath are silenced forever. The issues that Manjunath’s murder raises are not confined to IOC employees alone. There are thousands of honest people in this country who draw attention to financial and other irregularities in the system and end up paying dearly for this. In December 2003, Satyendra Dubey, an engineer in Bihar, drew the attention of the Prime Minister’s Office to corruption in the Golden Quadrilateral Project. His name was leaked by someone in the official establishment and he was killed. Public outrage generated by Dubey’s killing triggered demands for legislation to protect whistleblowers. At that time the Supreme Court even got the NDA government to commit to such legislation. But little has moved on the matter since then. A couple of months ago the government said it was preparing a draft bill on the issue. Two years after the death of Dubey, whistleblowers still have no protection in this country. Manjunath’s death could have been prevented had the government acted swiftly and enacted legislation. It did not. This is not an issue on which the government should be procrastinating. People with dreams of cleaning up a corrupt system are getting killed. The least the government can do is protect their identities.

CVC – Machinery to be in place to act on whistle-blowers complaint

Machinery to be in place to act on whistle-blowers complaint

NEW DELHI, MAY 11 (PTI) http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.asp?id=221049 With a view to encourage and protect honest persons in their attempt to expose corrupt public functionaries, government today said pending bill on protection of informers, a suitable administrative machinery will be put in place for CVC to act on complaints from "whistle-blowers". The Law Commission vide its 179th Report had prepared "The Public Interest Disclosure (Protection of informers) Bill. An official release said pending the Bill to become a law, government vide a Resolution authorised the CVC to inquire into the complaints and take requisite action. Highlighting the features of the Resolution, the release said no action will be taken on anonymous complaints and the CVC will ascertain the genuineness of the complainant and the complaint. The identity of the complainant will not be revealed, it said adding that CVC may call upon CBI or police to render all assistance in the investigation and if the probe reveal either mis-use of office or substantiate corruption charge, CVC may recommend appropriate proceedings against concerned Government servant. Besides, the CVC may recommend appropriate administrative steps for redressing the loss caused to the Government and initiation of criminal proceedings if warranted by the facts and circumstances of the case as well as taking correcting measures to prevent recurrence of such events in future. On written request, the CVC will give suitable directions to the concerned government authorities to protect the complainant or witness from victimization and appropriate step could be taken by the CVC if the complaint was found to be motivated and vexatious. The CVC may not inquire into any disclosure if a formal and public inquiry has been ordered under the Public Servants Inquiries Act or if the matter was already referred for inquiry under the Commission of Inquiry Act. The Government Resolution further said that CVC may initiate action as per extant regulations against the person or agency who discloses the identity of the complainant.