Will the Lokpal bill put an end to corruption?

1. Seriously under consideration is the Lokpal bill/anti-corruption bill, as proposed by the Lokpal team of Anna Hazare, Prasanth Bhooshan, Kiran Bedi, Aravind Kejriwal and others. Indian socio-political scenario deeply reflects on undertaking a ‘code of conduct’, which binds, the three tiers of governance. First introduced in 1968, the bill failed to amass support owing to its constant checks on the political bodies. For example [the proposed bill features that], complaints against any officer of Lokpal will be investigated and completed within a month and, if found to be substantive, will result in the officer being dismissed within two months. 
2. Is the bill a harbinger to justice? Are those methods appropriated by Lokpal activists truly democratic? Above all, is it necessary to institute a ‘fifth estate’ to look into other four? These acts of self-appointed do-gooders, however well meaning, usurps the role of “representatives of the people” without due process of election. Justice as guaranteed by our constitution isn’t claimed using a special act. See the case of Right to Information Act. Being accessible doesn’t always mean being accountable. Corruption in India attained a cancerous character, with the unwishful politician-bureaucrat nexus. Lokpal [citizen’s ombudsman] cannot always handle the issues with delicacy. Know why, the provision to Lokpal which will have complete power and authority to independently investigate and prosecute any officer, judge or politician necessitates unlawful authority in a single body of persons. An authority to oversee the authorities we elect?
3. The single meaning of democracy is incomplete with its defects. So too is Indian democracy. A one-time settlement cannot ensure us a better government. Lokpal, once being constituted extends to possibilities of being autocratic. Participatory nation building is the first step to better government and better citizenship. Thereby, Lokpal bill should be a means, not an end.