Prasad Vanjale,

I do agree with you that each of us should try to practice what we expect from the politicians... we should not receive or give bribes, at the minimum.

But if you try to make this the first step or a pre-condition to create a corruption-free nation, I'm afraid you're off the mark.

By the same logic, we don't need any police or courts. Let each of us first become honest, sincere and fair. We won't need police or courts.

We know very well that while an individual (you/ I) can set high personal goals, it is Utopian to expect the society to do that,... much less to educate the society to become that.

So, we need laws, law enforcement agencies, etc. We're a reasonable law-abiding society ONLY because we have the checks in the form of police and courts.

Similarly, when the existing laws are inadequate, either because of the laws or the enforcers, it is we, the people (the affected) who should turn the heat on the politicians and the rest of the ruling class (incl. the bureaucrats and judiciary) and fine-tune the systems (checks and balances). This is an eternal process.

This is democracy. NOT just voting once in 5 years and minding our business.

Some people ask if the right Lokpal Bill will root out corruption. Has any Bill, or even our whole constitution, at any stage, solved all our problems? That's why we've amended the constitution so many times. In an ever changing world, it's foolish to stick to old laws. Change, we should, as and when we need.

So the Lokpal Bill is just another fine-tuning in the war between the society and the anti-socially inclined rulers who have taken corruption to new highs (or do you call, new lows?) and want no checks on corruption. (I'm NOT saying ALL the rulers/ politicians are anti-socially inclined. Personally I believe a cast majority of them are.)

We have a Government to make sure the society moves forward and anti-social forces that try to disrupt the development are kept in check.

What do we do when the rulers themselves become anti-social? We use Annas to set things right.

Some people ask if Anna is a Gandhi. No two people were or would ever be exactly alike. If by Gandhi, we mean someone who takes on political evil and attempts to correct the situation, yes Anna is.

In fact, if what Lord Krishna said in the Bhagavad Geetha is true, Anna is Lord Krishna. By this I'm NOT equating Anna to God. I'm just saying this in the specific context of Anna taking on the the 'Adharm' rulers.

Lord Krishna, in my view, didn't promise that He Himself would be born again, but just that this is a law of nature. When things go bad beyond the flash point, someone will take the leadership and fight injustice, and redeem the world from the unjust.

Let's understand that the lesser mortals (you and I included) will be lesser mortals. They won't ALL become good and saintly one day, and then the evil will be rooted out automatically. No. The evil must be rooted out first and fair laws must be made to prevail, and the rulers enforcing such just laws will make sure we all behave ourselves, or face the music.

Since most of the people (say 98%) are neither 'too bad' or 'too good', but just fence sitters, we will behave when forced to. That's how you bring about a reasonably fair equilibrium in the society.

Ganesan. :~)