RTI Convention at Lucknow

Highlights of

One Day Convention on Third Anniversary of RTI Act, 2005

Organised by: Right to Information Action Group, UP

Location: Nirala Sabhagaar, Hindi Sansthan, Hazrat Ganj, Lucknow – UP

Date: October 12, 2008.

Chief Guest: Mr. Shailesh Gandhi, Central Information Commissioner, India

Special Guest: Justice (Retd.) Kamleshwar Nath of Allahabad High Court

Other persons on the dais: Mr. Izhar Ansari, RTI activist

Others Present: RTI activists from all over the state of Uttar Pradesh, media persons and members of the public.

Some blips as starter:

1. No representative of the State Information Commission of Uttar Pradesh was present. Given the fact that the CIC was there, the absence of representation of the SIC attains significance. Did the organizers not invite anyone from SIC or did they not turn up? This question needs to be answered, as a large part of the convention actually hammered upon the functioning of the Information Commissioners. The CIC in his address himself focused on the working of the information commissioners and their faulty working.
2. Some journalist friends were found discussing that when the CIC arrived in Lucknow no Officer of the State Government was there to receive him at the railway station. Neither any official vehicle was send for the CIC. The grapevine doing the rounds was that it was much later that a car was send by the administration to ferry the CIC.
3. Mr. Shailendra Singh (State President of Congress (I) RTI task Force) was conspicuous by his absence. He was in news for being arrested by the Police for asking questions on the Ambedkar Udyaan a dream project of Chief Minister Mayawati which is alleged to be costing a lot to the exchequer.

***

The event was a remarkable event with the conglomeration of so many activists from diverse locations of Uttar Pradesh having hands on experience in the field of RTI, coming on a common platform. They shared their experiences and resolved to work relentlessly to further the cause of transparency in public offices. Some highlights of the convention revealed through the presentations of various activists are illustrated below.

1. The victimization of RTI workers and information seekers was the most prime issue being brought up and discussed at the convention. People from all over the state reported victimization by state, administration and police machinery. They were penalized for asking questions from the various departments. Many information seekers were even laden with police cases to deter them from asking questions which were uncomfortable for the system to answer. There was a unanimous view on this issue.

Many activists presented their experiences in victimization of RTI workers and common man. They even reported case studies documented by them in this regard. A need was felt for concerted effort in this direction to build pressure on state, administration and also the judicial machinery to look into such cases and take steps that further victimization of RTI workers is prevented.

Mr. OP Sharma from the State RTI Task Force of Congress (I) suggested that some kind of statutory protection be accorded to the RTI workers and information seekers under the act itself. Importantly, Mr. Sharma addressed the people present as the participants in the second freedom movement of India.

Jitendra Chaturvedi of DEHAT (A voluntary organization from Behraich district in Uttar Pradesh) shared his experiences in using RTI as a tool to bring rightful justice to the residents of the forest areas. He narrated that an effective tool in this regard would be to file multiple RTI applications of same nature in various names. Then it would be difficult for the system to crawl back at the information seekers as the number of people would be very large. It was a pragmatic solution and he has himself used this method while doing community work. He got 50 applications filed in one case and no one was victimized.

2. Expansion / extension of the concept of the Assistant / Public Information Officer (A/PIO) was another contribution of this convention. It was again a unanimous view that the A/PIO is not only the person who is designated to be such under the provisions of the act. In-fact, in many cases the A/PIO is a very junior cadre officer in the system who is designated to be such. The information sought may not directly fall in the purview / control of the A/PIO. So s/he may have to collect it from some other person / officer / department in the organization and then provide it to the information seeker.

Thus it becomes important for the Appellate Authority (AA) and also the Information Commissioners (ICs) to consider the merits of this point while deciding any case against any A/PIO. The concept of A/PIO shall by extension include any person in whose possession such information lies. And if such person denies the information or prevents the A/PIO from providing such information or is deemed to have denied such information (as provided in the act) then such person should / also be responsible for failure to comply with the provisions of the RTI Act. Penalty may also be imposed against him / her and not only the A/PIO so designated.

Writers Submission: In this regard readers may refer to this news item. A senior officer victimizes a junior A/PIO for providing the information. Please see this news item from Ludhiana.

3. The inclusion of political parties and seeking their commitment for furtherance of this cause also figured as an issue. In a democracy many roads end at the gates of politics and politicians. While this was the view of the people at the convention, the organizers reported that when they approached the people from various political parties they were either apprehensive of attending this convention or asked that what they would be required to do at the convention? Mr. Izhar Ansari one of the organizers of the event quipped that most politicians are either interested in inaugurating events or chairing the sessions. With great effort the organizers were able to rope in a representative of Congress (I), (whose name this writer has forgot). This guy submitted that as Congress is the party who has introduced this Act, their commitment should not be doubted.

4. The office should not provide TA/DA to A/PIO for attending appeals at the Information Commission. Any failure to provide the information should be deemed to be a personal failure of the A/PIO and no TA / DA should be provided by the office for attending appeals at the Information Commission.

Writer Submits: Appeals at ICs is also being misused by many government officers for doing their personal work in the state capital. As many of them are located in far-off places in the state, traveling to the state capital entails considerable expense and time. But, when they come for attending an appeal at the IC they not only get TA/DA but also get duty leave from their office. Time and official resource are used to get personal work done at the state capital.

5. The issue of monitoring of penalty realized from the A/PIO was also raised. It was reported by the activists that many A/PIO were fined by the ICs but they were either not paying the fine or where the fine has gone was not known to anyone. So a monitoring system should be evolved to keep check in this area.

6. The income tax returns should not fall in the category of exempted information. All income tax returns should be made available on the websites (if possible). This would actually help in reducing corruption in public offices. Many irregularities and disparities in incomes of people can be located from what they declare before income tax authorities. If this is made possible it will automatically deter people from engaging in corruption in public offices. What people earn and report to income tax are quite apart. This information can be easily had from any income tax return.

Presentation of Mr. Justice (Retd.) Kamleshwar Nath.

For sake of brevity they are also being presented in a point wise manner.

1. Provision of monitoring of penalty levied on the A/PIO should be evolved.
2. The penalty charged from the A/PIO should be paid to the applicant.
3. RTI Act is the implementation of the fundamental rights conferred upon the people under the Article 19 (The Six Freedoms) of the Constitution of India.
4. Extending the concept of A/PIO was necessary for the smooth functioning of the RTI Act. It should mean to include any person with the information rests.
5. He stressed on the need to establish Gram Nyayaalayas (Village Courts). This would help in the effective implementation of the RTI provisions.
6. Officers called for attending the appeals at SIC/CIC should not be reimbursed any TA/DA by the state.
7. A large number of Committees and Commissions are set up the Government to look into various issues. People should raise questions on their reports and action taken on these reports.
8. State should be prevented from increasing the scope of section 8 (the exempting section) and the scope of section 6 should be sought to be increased. Constant public pressure should be build on state and prevent it from doing such acts as would increase the scope of section 8.
9. A question was raised on whether an NGO or Association can seek information under the RTI Act. To which the learned Justice replied that the Section 3 of the RTI Act provides that “subject to the provisions of this Act” any “Citizen” can seek information. Who is a Citizen may be drawn from the provisions of the General Clauses Act where any “person” can be a citizen. A person can be natural or artificial (it includes Association of Persons, Body of Individuals, Firms, Societies and even Companies incorporated / registered under any act of law). So an NGO or association is very much entitled to ask questions under the RT Act.
10. The Justice also commented on a decision of Prof. MM Ansari (Information Commissioner) where Ansari had ruled that a suspended employee may not ask questions under the RTI Act. Ansari has opined that as there is an established procedure of law to deal with suspended employees such people would not be eligible to ask questions under the RTI Act. But, the Justice stated that there was nothing that prevented a suspended employee from seeking recourse under this Act because a suspended employee continues to be a citizen and a person.

***

The most enthralling presentation was made by Shailesh Gandhi, the CIC himself. He charmed the audience by addressing the people present as “swatantra desh ke partantra naagrikon” (loosely translated in English as: slave citizens of a free country.)

The highlights of his presentation are as under:

1. The very first poser thrown by him was that why are we still “partantra” or slaves? If it is so, it is our fault. For if, activists are being victimized in Uttar Pradesh (UP), it is a reflection on the governance in UP. In a democracy the government belongs to the public. Inherent meaning being that we should think of governments that are sensitive to people or we are responsible for putting a government in power that victimizes its people.
2. He narrated a case where he had asked the uses of the money in Maharashtra CM Relief Fund. The answer was not easy to come by for the state defended that it was a personal / discretionary fund of the CM. Gandhi fought that it was still created by the taxpayers money and things reached the gates of the SIC in Maharashtra. But nobody victimized him. The answers received after a long battle were indeed shocking that the funds were used for organizing Gazals programmes, Kabbaddi Matches, money was given to Press Club and even constructing latrines for CM in Maharashtra Bhawan at Delhi.
3. Politics becomes power politics. You get associated with a political party to exert power. That’s what happens in India. Ordinary works are not being done without political pressures. In America, someone can call up Passport Office and inquire about the status of his/her passport. Something you can’t even expect in India. The official view will be something like “how dare you ask it over the telephone?”
4. The state machinery would always like to increase the scope of exemptions in the RTI Act. But here he refers to the public action for driving away a government that existed in India before 1947. That was not our government so we drove it away. Now it’s our government. Can’t we take up the cause of protecting an Act? Can’t we protect the sanctity of one act?
5. He criticized the process of selecting Information Commissioners. The fact that he has been selected does not validate the process itself. In his views the nominations should come from the public and then the ICs be selected.
6. Even courts don’t want to be transparent. Many courts have put exorbitant fees of Rs. 5000/- or Rs. 3000/- for filing RTI applications.
7. In reality everyone wants others to become transparent.
8. Use of RTI is akin to the discovery of truth. The truth which is largely captivated in the files of the government system.
9. Hitting at a common argument by the government machinery that RTI is a tool of blackmailing, Gandhi referred to the PC Alexender Committee where it was quipped that we got independence through truth and now why we are getting afraid of the truth coming out?
10. RTI is a tool and not a weapon. Let’s have a positive view on the issue. Weapon is used to kill / harm an enemy. Our government is not our enemy for we have put it in power. We do not necessarily wish to destroy our governments (by using a weapon).
11. He criticized the working of the ICs. Appeals should not be lingered on. RTI should not go the way of “justice delayed is justice denied.”
12. He reported that he has been given only two clerks. He types his orders on his own and delivers on the same day the case is disposed.
13. Now he has decided to take salary of the CIC and from which he shall pay the staff that he shall appoint on his own for the working of the commission.
14. He may even put donation box at the office of the CIC, if still the funds are not sufficient.
15. He suggested that the courts should also do their work fast. CIC can’t function as court. The job of court would have to be done by a court.
16. The civil society should pressurize their ICs to do timely disposal of cases.
17. Adjournments should be stopped and time bound reply should be given to applicants.

*****

Writer’s submissions:

1. On the issue of the victimization of RTI workers an effort can be made to use the internet and connect with activists of far-off places. As personal security and safety is important to all of us, we can raise public interest questions through people who may be located in distant places. Say for eg. Someone in Lucknow may ask questions for issues related to Chennai. Someone from Bihar may ask a question for issues related to offices in Maharashtra.

This can reduce victimization to a large extent. It would be difficult for the machinery to go and victimize people in other / far-off states. This way we can do public work without jeopardizing our personal security. Readers may debate the idea and send their feedback on tellsachin@yahoo.com

2. The idea of according official protection to the information seekers is also a valid one. A machinery be evolved right up-to the commission level to look into such cases. Even the police can be asked to create a special wing to look into such cases.

***

A report prepared by:

Sachin Agarwal
Secretary
Society for People’s Action, Change and Enforcement (SPACE)
Phone: 94152 55042