The Anna Movement, also known as the India Against Corruption (IAC) movement, was a nationwide anti-corruption protest led by social activist Anna Hazare in 2011. The movement aimed to bring transparency and accountability in governance by demanding the implementation of a strong Lokpal (ombudsman) bill. It gained massive public support, with millions of Indians rallying across the country, demanding an end to corruption in political and bureaucratic institutions.

Background of the Anna Movement

Corruption had been a long-standing issue in India, with scandals and scams surfacing regularly. However, the movement gained momentum due to widespread anger against massive corruption cases such as:

• 2G Spectrum Scam – Estimated loss of ₹1.76 lakh crore to the government.
• Commonwealth Games Scam – Estimated loss of ₹70,000 crore.
• Adarsh Housing Scam – A housing project meant for war veterans was fraudulently allotted to politicians and bureaucrats.

These scandals fueled public outrage, leading to the formation of the India Against Corruption (IAC) campaign, spearheaded by Anna Hazare, Arvind Kejriwal, Kiran Bedi, Prashant Bhushan, and other activists.

Anna Hazare: The Face of the Movement

Anna Hazare, a retired Indian Army soldier and social activist, had previously led successful anti-corruption initiatives in Maharashtra, particularly in his village, Ralegan Siddhi. He had been advocating for the Jan Lokpal Bill, a stronger version of the government’s proposed Lokpal and Lokayukta Bill.

Hazare announced an indefinite hunger strike on April 5, 2011, at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi, demanding the immediate implementation of the Jan Lokpal Bill. His fast gained immense public support, leading to massive protests across India.

Key Demands of the Movement

The core demand of the Anna Movement was the Jan Lokpal Bill, which included:

1. An independent anti-corruption body – The Lokpal should have complete independence from the government to investigate corruption cases.
2. Power to investigate the Prime Minister and judiciary – The proposed bill aimed to bring even the Prime Minister and higher judiciary under Lokpal’s jurisdiction.
3. Time-bound investigation – Corruption cases should be investigated and resolved within one year.
4. Protection for whistleblowers – Individuals exposing corruption should be given legal protection.
5. Civic participation in governance – Citizens should have the right to file complaints and monitor government work.

Mass Mobilization and Public Support

The movement spread across India, with millions of people joining protests in major cities such as Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, and Chennai. Social media played a crucial role in mobilizing support, making it one of India’s first large-scale digital movements. The movement was compared to global uprisings such as the Arab Spring due to its widespread participation and impact.

• People from all walks of life – students, professionals, retirees, and housewives – actively participated.
• Protesters carried Indian flags, wore Gandhi caps, and chanted slogans like “Bharat Mata ki Jai” and “Anna Tum Sangharsh Karo, Hum Tumhare Saath Hain.”
• Bollywood celebrities, spiritual leaders, and former bureaucrats extended their support.

Government Response and Political Drama

The movement put immense pressure on the then UPA government led by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Initially, the government attempted to ignore the protests, but as public anger grew, they engaged in discussions with IAC leaders. However, no significant breakthrough was achieved.

On August 16, 2011, Anna Hazare was arrested before starting his second hunger strike, triggering widespread protests across the country. Within hours, public pressure forced the government to release him, and he continued his fast at Ramlila Maidan in Delhi.

After 12 days of fasting, the Parliament agreed to consider three key demands of the movement, leading to a temporary victory for the protestors.

Decline of the Movement

Despite initial success, the movement gradually lost momentum due to:

1. Political divisions – Differences emerged among IAC members regarding their future strategy. Arvind Kejriwal later formed the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in 2012, while Anna Hazare remained non-political.
2. Government delays – The Parliament did not pass the Jan Lokpal Bill immediately, frustrating supporters.
3. Media fatigue – As the movement continued, media attention shifted to other issues, reducing public enthusiasm.
4. Internal conflicts – Several key members left due to ideological differences.

Impact of the Anna Movement

While the movement did not fully achieve its objective, it created a massive awareness against corruption and led to several key developments:

1. Passage of the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013

After years of delay, the government passed a weaker version of the Lokpal Bill in 2013, setting up an anti-corruption body at the national and state levels. However, it lacked several provisions of the original Jan Lokpal Bill.

2. Rise of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP)

Arvind Kejriwal, one of the prominent faces of the movement, formed the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in 2012, focusing on governance reforms and anti-corruption measures. The party’s success in Delhi elections marked a significant political impact of the movement.

3. Strengthening of Citizen Activism

The movement inspired many citizens to actively participate in governance, file RTIs (Right to Information requests), and demand accountability from public officials.

4. Anti-Corruption Awareness

The movement instilled fear among corrupt politicians and bureaucrats, making corruption a central election issue in subsequent years.

Criticism of the Anna Movement

Despite its success, the movement faced several criticisms:

• Unrealistic demands – Some experts believed that the Jan Lokpal Bill would create a parallel bureaucracy, leading to power struggles.
• Political opportunism – Critics accused IAC leaders of using the movement for political ambitions, especially after Kejriwal formed AAP.
• Media-driven hype – Some believed that the movement relied too much on media attention and lacked a sustainable long-term strategy.
• Failure to bring long-term change – Corruption remained a persistent issue in India even after the movement’s peak.

Conclusion

The Anna Movement was a historic public uprising against corruption, showcasing the power of peaceful protests and mass mobilization. While it did not completely eradicate corruption, it left a lasting impact on Indian politics, leading to governance reforms, the rise of new political players, and increased public awareness. The movement demonstrated that citizens’ voices can influence national policies, making it one of the most significant civil movements in modern India.

Despite its decline, the Anna Movement remains a symbol of people’s power in democracy, proving that public participation and activism can challenge the status quo and demand accountability from those in power.