Govt admits illegal appointments.

GreaterKashmir.com:Friday, September 30, 2011.

Srinagar, Sep 29: The Government on Thursday admitted that illegal appointments were made in departments due to which information sought from them has not been furnished fully.
Responding to a query in Legislative Council, Minister for Finance Abdul Rahim Rather said that cabinet sub-committee has sought information from departments about number of daily wagers engaged after 1994.
“There is difficulty in seeking information from departments as I presume they (daily wagers) were engaged illegally. Despite cabinet order in the year 1994 daily wagers were engaged,” he said.
There are clear Government instructions to departments, he said, not to engage daily wagers.
“We can engage casual and seasonal labours but not daily wagers. Government has authorized Power Development Department, PWD, School Education, Rural Development to engage casual or seasonal labors on need basis,” he replied.
Replying to a query whether cabinet sub-committee has been constituted for regularization of the casual labors, he said that departments have been advised to furnish details of these engagements.
However, MLC Rafiq Shah interrupted him saying when Government says nobody is being appointed how are the casual labours being appointed.
The Minister said that there is nothing wrong in receiving application as Finance department has given right to some departments to engage casual and seasonal labors. “The Cabinet sub-committee advised departments to furnish details so as to enable the committee to go into the extent or magnitude of the problem relating to casual workers only; financial, legal, and administrative that may arise in the regularization of such temporary workers and work out an appropriate policy in this regard. Since information has been found inadequate the departments were requested to furnish references of offices who engaged these casual labours,” he replied to MLC Bashir Ahmad Magray.
‘Disposal of RTI applications delayed’
The Government on Thursday acknowledged some delay in disposal of application seeking information under the Right to Information Act 2009 in J&K.
Responding to a query in Legislative Council seeking details of the number of applications received till August this year, Finance Minister Abdul Rahim Rather informed 560 applications were disposed with delays.
The total number of applications, he said received by the Public Information Officers (PIO) this year till August has been 7328.
“6184 RTI applications have been disposed of within statutory period this year by various departments. Only 584 are pending for disposal with PIOs,” he stated in a written reply on behalf of Chief Minister.
He said that 306 cases are pending for disposal with State Information Commission. “In eleven cases fine, penalty or caution has been issued by Chief Information Commission,” he stated.

SIC fines two ZP officers.

Daily Bhaskar:Friday, September 30, 2011.

Pune: State information commissioner (SIC), Pune, Vijay Kuvalekar has imposed a fine of Rs 5,000 on the appellate authority of Solapur zilla parishad (ZP) for not adhering to his order to furnish information to a Right to Information (RTI) applicant, Nagnath Patil.

Patil had filed an application under the RTI Act, 2005, last year to the zilla parishad education board asking for copies of the enquiry made by the then education officer of the Solapur Zilla Parishad, S Maniyar, regarding the irregularities in the teachers' recruitment in 1977-78.

Patil had been complaining about irregularities on the matter for a long time following which the zilla parishad had constituted an enquiry headed by Maniyar in 2002-03.

After he failed to get any response, Patil filed an appeal with the appellate authority of the zilla parishad, MG Ambedkar, who too failed to respond. Patil filed a second appeal with the SIC Pune.

While hearing the second appeal, Kuvalekar, in July, had ordered the appellate authority to furnish the information within 8 days. Moreover, as a follow up, the SIC's office had sent reminders but Ambedkar's office had failed to either respond or give information to Patil.

Kuvalekar slapped a fine of Rs 10,000 on the public information officer of zilla parishad Solapur, SK Sage, for not furnishing the information. A fine of Rs 5,000 was also imposed on Ambedkar for not following the SIC's orders and failing to give information to the applicant.

RTI activist’s suicide: HC dismisses PIL seeking compensation.

Ahmedabad Newsline:Friday, September 30, 2011.

The Gujarat High Court on Thursday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) demanding compensation to the family members of RTI activist Jabbardan Gadhvi who had immoltaed himself in Bhuj in October last year. The petition had also sought action against the responsible persons behind the entire episode.

The court dismissed the petition on the ground that it was devoid of public interest and that the petitioner has alternate remedy available.

The petition was moved by People’s Union for Civil Liberties and Jabbardan’s brother Mavaldan Gadhvi.

Jabbardan ended his life on October 22 last year after he was allegedly denied some revenue records related to his ancestral land by the local authorities under the RTI Act. He had made his intentions clear a few days before his self-immolation.

Mavaldan had lodged a complaint against three persons - a local mamlatdar, a talati and a sub-inspector - for abetting and not preventing the suicide. However, the three have challenged the FIR at the HC, which has stayed the investigation in the case.

While dismissing the PIL, the HC observed that the criminal prosecution was already initiated against the three accused officers and that the petitioners had alternate remedy available if they were not satisfied with the probe so far.

RTI panel fines health officer.

The Hindu:Thursday,September 28, 2011.

The Karnataka Information Commission has imposed penalty of Rs. 10,000 against Mangalore City Corporation's Health Officer Manjaiah Shetty. The commission has found him guilty of providing incomplete information about the stock inventory of drugs.

The Commission passed this order on a complaint filed by B. Prakash Bhat. On May 6, 2010, Mr. Bhat sought from the Health Department the certified copies of the stock inventory of drugs at the end of March 2009 and March 2010. Mr. Shetty filed a complaint following delay in giving the information, which was also incomplete.

In the order of September 5, Chief Information Commissioner A.K. M. Nayak said the stock inventory copies provided by Mr. Shetty did not contain the names of the drugs and its quantity. Mr. Shetty had failed to give satisfactory explanation for this lapse. “Even after pointing out the lapse, the official has failed to provide the information despite giving him time,” Mr. Nayak said. Mr. Nayak imposed a fine of Rs. 10,000 under Section 20 (1) of the Right To Information (RTI) Act. He has directed the Joint Commissioner Vijaya Kumari Shenoy to deduct Rs. 5,000 each from September and October salaries of Mr. Shetty and deposit the same in the account. She has been asked to report about the compliance to the Commission on December 15.

DoPT favours disclosure of PPP agreement details.

The Times of India: Himanshi Dhawan:Thursday,September 28, 2011.

NEW DELHI: The Central Information Commission has found support from the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) on the controversial issue of increased disclosure of public private partnership (PPP) agreements. The DoPT is of the view that details of all PPP projects should be disclosed on a suo-moto basis for greater transparency.
The department was responding to an RTI application filed by activist Venkatesh Nayak asking for audit reports of PPP projects. This is in sharp contrast to the Planning Commission's view that PPP agreements are contracts with private entities and do not come under the purview of RTI Act. The CIC had in January asked the plan panel to consider modifications within PPP agreements to ensure public disclosure of details related to infrastructure projects that were being funded by the state exchequer.
Responding to chief information commissioner Satyananda Mishra's suggestions on bringing PPP projects under the purview of the Act, DoPT said, "A decision is to be taken by the respective ministry or ministry of finance which is responsible for laying down policies for PPP agreements. However, if such practice is built into the system, it would lead to greater transparency. What is equally important is that once PPP projects are approved, all details of the project, periodic payments, if any, made to the concessionaire and achievements against the contracts should be disclosed on a suo-moto basis by the concerned ministry/department on a regular basis.''
While it turned down CIC's suggestion for making amendments to the definition of 'public authority' in the RTI Act terming it illegal, the DoPT said, "It would not be legal to expand a definition of an Act through a private arrangement of a contract."
The department added that draft concession agreements should include relevant information allowing the ministry to disclose information on behalf of the private entity.
Incidentally, the plan panel had turned down the CIC's views on making changes in the PPP agreement but sought the law ministry's views in the matter.

Hazare’s lawyer writes to Moily over statements on RTI.

Pune Newsline:Thursday,September 28, 2011.

Reacting to an interview of Veerappa Moily about RTI and its effects published in The Indian Express on Sunday, Anna Hazare’s lawyer Milind Pawar has written to Moily stating that his statements were in contradiction to the promise made by Union government to Hazare. Moily had stated that the RTI transgresses into independent functioning of the government. A copy of the letter has also been sent to the Prime Minister’s Office.

The interview, which was published on September 25, quotes Moily as saying, “In the context of RTI exposures, people are misreading things. Transparency, yes, but it cannot scuttle the independence of individuals and ministries expressing difference of opinion. It’s time for a national debate on this issue.”

The letter to Moily says Hazare had undertaken a fast in 2007 for RTI, during which the Central government had promised transparency through RTI. “‘The public has a right to know the decisions made by ministers. There is no need to amend the Act or bring about a fresh discussion on the same,” it says. Pawar said the \letter had been sent in consultation with Hazare.

'No RTI query to Prez, guvs and CJI'

Hindustan Times:Nagendar Sharma:Thursday,September 28, 2011.

Right to Information (RTI) applications should not be addressed to the offices of the President, governors of all the states, the Chief Justice of India and the Lok Sabha Speaker, the law ministry has proposed.

The proposal by the legal arm of the government is based on the opinion of a senior law officer, who has stated that partial exemption of these high constitutional offices would not adversely affect citizens' right to know.

Additional Solicitor General Vivek Tankha has pointed out that information sought by RTI applicants from these high offices is available with the government departments concerned dealing with them and the RTI applications should be filed there.

The law ministry has informed the offices of all the four constitutional authorities that it proposes to keep out of the purview of the information law. "The information generated in course of the discharge of governance functions is available with the government departments concerned and transparency is in no way adversely affected by positing these constitutional positions outside the ambit of the RTI Act," he said.

"Any information received by the President/governors, is deemed to be available with the corresponding departments/ministries of governments," he added.

Tankha, in his interpretation of the RTI Act, pointed out that the high four constitutional offices mentioned by him do not figure in the list of designated authorities that have to provide information.

"Constitutional authorities as defined under the RTI Act, 2005, are competent authorities and not public authorities, who have been mandated to provide information," he wrote.

On the question of certain specific information available with only these four offices, Tankha stated that reports sent in exercise of constitutional functions of exceptional nature are covered under specific exemptions granted under relevant sections of the RTI Act.

The opinion came in response to a notice issued by the State Information of Goa to the governor, directing him to appear personally before the commission for the Raj Bhawan's failure to reply to a RTI query.

CBI demanded only partial exemption from RTI Act.

Business Standard: Wednesday, 28 September 2011.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which is probing several high-profile corruption cases, had demanded only partial exemption from the ambit of the RTI Act as per its initial proposal but later pressed for a blanket cover which was approved by the government this year.

The file notings provided by the Department of Personnel and Training, under RTI Act, show that in 2007, Committee of Secretaries had rejected the demand of the CBI to be included in the list of organisations exempted from the RTI Act except on allegations of human rights violations and corruption.

It had said CBI can utilise provisions of the RTI Act to reject an information.

This year, CBI, which is probing several high profile cases like 2G scam, CWG scam and Adarsh Scam, pushed a fresh demand seeking "limited exemption" from the RTI Act in areas of intelligence collection, secret verification besides internal analysis of evidence and sources or process involved in its collection.

The request of the agency was termed as "vague" by the officials of the DoPT who demanded "full justifications" for such a demand.

The Central Vigilance Commissioner has also opined that only intelligence gathering arm of the CBI can be brought under the exemption clauses of the RTI Act.

The then Solicitor General of India Gopal Subramaniam had opined that the CBI can be considered to be added in the second schedule of the RTI Act, "with the qualification that after seeing out the words Central Bureau of Investigation certain words in parenthesis will be added i.e. 'except matters pertaining to administration, personnel, accounts/finance, budget and training."

Civic body’s tax collection system inefficient: NGO

The Times of India: Wednesday, 28 September 2011.

PUNE: Property owners whose property tax is valued over Rs 25,000 have failed to pay tax worth Rs 420 crore by March 31, 2011 to the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC).
Over 24,000 residential property owners have not paid property tax of Rs 185 crore, while 16,000 non residential property owners have not paid tax of Rs 180 crore. Seventyfive government and non-government offices in the city have also failed to pay tax of Rs 9 crore. Also, the PMC has failed to collect tax of Rs 44 crore as cases in this regard are pending in the court.
"This is the list of defaulters whose property tax is valued at more than Rs 25,000. If the PMC decides to go for list of defaulters whose tax value is less then Rs 25,000, the civic body will find that over Rs 125 crore is to be recovered from them," said Vishwas Sahastrabuddhe, member of Pune Nagrik Sanghatana (PNS) who had sought property tax information under the Right to Information Act (RTI).
The PNS members have demanded that the PMC should efficiently recover the dues and also improve the functioning of the tax collection department. "Since 1980 the PMC has only 210 staff members in the tax collection department. This shows the apathy towards the department. The civic administration should immediately take steps to recover the property tax," states a press statement issued by PNS.
The PMC tax department officials admitted that because of the shortage staff it was impossible to recover property tax. "The demand to recruit more staff is pending for long. We have taken initiatives to recover maximum tax with the help of available staff, but then we have limitations," said one of the officials, requesting anonymity. He added that the PMC has not developed any mechanism to reach over six lakh property owners in the city.

RTI DAY :Our 'Right to Know'

Republica:Tanka Aryal:Nepal:Wednesday, 28 September 2011.

Today, September 28, is the Right to Know Day (RTK Day). This day is dedicated for transparency and openness. The goal of RTK Day is to raise global awareness of individuals’ right to access government information and to promote Right to Information (RTI) as a fundamental human right.
Openness and transparency are pre-requisites for democracy where RTI serves as a tool for it. People´s participation in the governance process and accountability of the service-provider toward citizens are essentials in a true democracy. RTI empowers public to get information from the public agencies, which ultimately increases the responsibility of the public agencies to be effective, transparent, accountable and efficient.
Informed citizenry is an asset of the country and foundation of democracy. Information facilitates democracy in two ways. First, it helps to ensure citizens to have the information required to participate meaningfully in the democratic process, and second, politicians and bureaucrats remain accountable to the citizenry. Democratic progress requires the ready availability of true and complete information. In this way, people can objectively evaluate their government´s policy. Thus, RTI is taken as a tool that promotes democracy.
In practice, RTI is considered as a very efficient instrument to bridge the gap between service provider and seeker. RTI empowers public and imposes obligation to the public agencies, which balances the power, rights and obligation of the demand and supply side of information.
Similarly, RTI is understood as a vibrant tool for promoting accountability and transparency. Without substantive guarantee of RTI, good governance remains just a dream.

It is true that public agencies are always trying to withhold information and function secretly. Massive pressure is needed to make bureaucracy transparent and pro-people, which is lacking in Nepal.

Considering its information, about 100 countries across the world have provided legal protection to RTI. Many of them have guaranteed it as a fundamental right in their constitution.
RTI is guaranteed as a fundamental right of the citizen by the Interim Constitution of Nepal. The implementing legislation, Right to Information Act, was enforced on August 20, 2007. Adoption of Right to Information Regulation 2009 and formation of an independent oversight body, the National Information Commission (NIC), are further positive indicators for the legal protection of RTI in Nepal.
Access to information is a right of everyone; access is the rule, secrecy is the exception. The RTI jurisprudence says application process should be simple, speedy, and free; officials have a duty to assist requestors; refusal of information must be justified; everyone has the right to appeal an adverse decision; public bodies should proactively publish core information; and the right should be guaranteed by an independent body. Most of the principles are adopted by Nepali laws protecting RTI.
The major problem of Nepal vis-à-vis RTI is the implementation. Proactive disclosure of information every three months, appointment of information officer in every public agency, update of the information on a regular basis, capacity building of the staffs of public agencies for the effective implementation of RTI laws are the some of the major areas that are totally ignored by public agencies.
The weak role of the NIC is another hindrance for implementation of RTI laws. Though NIC is mandated for protection, promotion and implementation of RTI Act, the role is not satisfactory. It is known that NIC is also facing human and financial shortage and non-cooperation from government in many cases.
The ignorance of the public regarding RTI is also a factor for not implementing RTI laws effectively. Many people have a misunderstanding that RTI is a right of media persons while those who know about it are reluctant to use it. It is true that public agencies are always trying to withhold information and function secretly. Massive pressure is needed to make bureaucracy transparent and pro-people, which is lacking in Nepal.
Considering the fact, awareness on RTI and RTK is essential in Nepal. One of the major objectives for marking RTK day is to create awareness among the general public about the existence of RTI laws and motivate them to apply it. Similarly, it is also to pressure public agencies to act according to the RTI laws of Nepal.
In Nepal, very few individual and organizations are working for the promotion and protection of right to information. The activities carried out by institutions like NIC and some NGO´s are not sufficient; it should be widened with the engagement of the larger NGO community and government agencies.
The writer is Executive Director of Citizens´ Campaign for Right to Information

'Selection of information commissioners is arbitrary'

Rediff:Priyanka:Tuesday, September 26, 2011.

Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi sold off his business in 2003 to do something relevant. The Indian Institute of Technology-Mumbai alumnus soon became a prolific user of the Right To Information Act and filed more than 800 RTI applications.

He was appointed the Information Commissioner at the Central Information Commission, New Delhi, in 2008.

In this freewheeling interview with rediff.com's Priyanka, Gandhi says that appellants must understand that law describes 'information' as something which 'exists', and only those can be given out.

He also notes that the selection of information commissioners continues to be arbitrary and faulty.

Approximately how many RTI applications are filed in all states across the country in one year ?

I feel 99 percent chances are that it is between 50 and 80 lakh applications per year. We don't have perfect count of it, but let me give you some figures:

Some of the state commissions published reports based on number of RTI applications filed in public authorities. Now, this is under-reporting because a lot of public authorities may not report to all the RTI applications filed with them. But the figures that come can never be an 'over-report' either.

The central commission had recorded that last year 550,000 RTI applications were filed in various central government bodies. The Maharashtra commission had recorded a similar figure for RTI applications filed in state government bodies.

Now, if you go by secondary data, the state of Uttar Pradesh has more appeals than both these taken together. And hence chances are the RTI applications are much more. Nonetheless, for Maharashtra state commission and central commission alone, the reported figure is about 11 lakh RTI applications in one year.

So, my own rough estimate is that probably 50 to 80 lakh RTI applications are filed every year in centre and state government bodies taken together.

How many RTI appeals does an information commissioner resolve in one year ?

If my memory serves me right, we had resolved about 24,000 cases in one year, but we had eight information commissioners at that time. Now, there are only six. So, maybe we will resolve around 20,000 cases this year.

Do you think enough is being done ?

No, absolutely not. This is something even I am concerned about, and is the primary reason why I chose to join the commission.

I couldn't have come here by choice; I came here because they asked me to join. My belief is that commissions must dispose whatever comes to them. For me, that is non-negotiable.

Not just the information commission, I am referring to all judicial and quasi-judicial systems in the country. Unfortunately, our judicial system doesn't work properly, and so most quasi-judicial organisations also think they don't need to. With this in mind, when I had joined, I had made a promise that in one year, I will make sure that the pendency of cases and appeals are not more than three months.

And I have been able to achieve this. Now, there is some change in portfolio and I have given some old cases which I am dealing with. But I will make sure again in another three months time that the pendency of cases will again be less than three months.

I will be completing three years as a commissioner now, and in this period I have personally disposed off over 15,000 cases, which is about 5,000 in a year. I believe it can be raised to 6,000 to 7,000 cases per year by each information commissioner.

Of all the RTI applications that you receive, how many of these are filed by ordinary citizens, and not RTI activists, to know for instance, why one is not getting a license made on time or related to other day-to-day services ?

I cannot give an exact percentile, but my guess is more than 80 percent are ordinary people. I have not done an analysis, so I am saying this based on my overall gut feel that about 70-80 percent of the appeals that reach me are made by ordinary people.

In my experience, I have observed that at our stage of appeals, 25-30 percent of these are based on RTI applications filed by RTI activists, rest are all ordinary citizens. But their number could be much higher.

A lot of times, a common citizen files a RTI application and he/she does not know what to do next. He/she either doesn't know or he/she doesn't want to pursue. And I see lots of them.

When an ordinary person files a RTI application, is there any counseling or guidance cell to assist him/her on how to go about it ?

It is not in the system, but there are a lot of citizen efforts, which help ordinary people. In Mumbai, I know dozens of them. In Delhi also there is a large number. People generally come to know these by word-of-mouth.

In Mumbai, for instance, people get to know that experts would be available for 2-3 hours every week to help them write RTI applications correctly. In Mumbai, there are at least 30 such centres, and typically, it is free of charge. And I am sure such things are there in various towns across the country.

The RTI act came with the mission to make sure that there is 'transparency and accountability in public dealings.' It is understandable that RTI makes workings transparent, but how does it fix accountability, because it does not punish anybody ?

Let me try and explain how we make people accountable. Let's say, the information commissioners do not say in public how many cases they resolved or have taken up, it is very unlikely that anybody would question us.

When one puts out figures, it amounts to pressure to deliver. And we making the figures of how many cases have been resolved and how many cases are pending; all these figures are displayed publically. That itself creates pressure from citizens.

As far as I know, there is no judicial or quasi-judicial body in this country which talks of any kind of accountability of how much they will deliver. The central information commission has at least come up with a norm and said that each commission will dispose at least 3,200 cases in one year.

In totality, I feel transparency leads to accountability. For instance in the Commonwealth Games scam, the fact that there was some transparency at some level and we came to know about what was happening on the inside, which then helped to fix accountability.

But the 'accountability' factor is an indirect pressure; transparency is understandably has a more direct relationship ?

Most certainly, I wouldn't deny that. But see this in a wider perspective; the fact that figures are being made public makes you feel that you have to be accountable, even if there is no public pressure.

When your performance is out there in the public, and if it is not good, people laugh at you if nothing else. And hence the human need to be praised and appreciated adds to the pressure to improve your performance or give greater accountability.

But do you think it will work on the thick-skinned politicians we have in the country today ?

I feel you are being too harsh on a particular group. Corruption in this country is a much deeper problem. I feel the government is not in a position to deliver. Accountability is completely missing.

Nobody is really bothered when and what they deliver in almost all walks of life. Secondly, government procedures are so archaic and nobody is paying any attention to change them, modify or improve them.

Back to RTI, on what grounds can a RTI application be rejected? What kind of information cannot be sought and what kind of institutions are barred from giving information ?

What can be sought under the RTI act is 'information' and there is a proper definition of 'information' in the law. In most simple terms, it has to exist. It sounds simple but very few people understand what 'information' is. And when somebody says it does not exist, they are not happy with it.

Government officials also do not understand what 'information' means. For example a 'clarification' is not 'information' and questions like 'what is the meaning of this law, are you working as per law, are you taking bribes,'; these are some of the most commonly asked questions, and none qualify as 'information' that can be sought. Information has to exist and a Personal Information Officer is obliged to give you what is on record. If it not mentioned on record, he will tell you so.

Second, one can ask for information only from a public authority. To put it simply all government offices are public authorities. Apart from this, any institution which is created by an act of Parliament or legislature is a public authority. For example, a university is notified by act of Parliament and it is a public authority.

There is another segment, comprising of bodies owned, controlled or substantially financed by the government sector, and information under the RTI act can be sought from them.

In my opinion any company where the government has more than 50 percent of holding, information can be sought. But it can also become tricky. For instance, a housing co-operative society is not controlled by government; it is not a public authority. However, if a registrar of housing society imposes an administrator to control a society, then it becomes a public authority, only as long as the administrator is appointed, because then it is being controlled by the government.

Some people also take the definition that all regulators are controllers, but this is a grey area and there are several rulings regarding this.

If a person wants to file an RTI application and he/she is not sure if it is a public authority or not, what should he/she do?

The person should anyway go ahead and file the RTI application; in 99 percent of the cases the body will say it is not a public authority.

They can file a complaint with the commission, but there should be some ground. If a body is saying it is not a public authority, I would expect a prudent citizen to think about it, if it really is a public authority and not coming rushing to the commission. Apply your own mind also. You have to go as per the law.

Section 3 of the RTI Act is the smallest and says that all citizens shall have the right to information. Section 8 (1) states what can be denied, there are ten exemptions granted. However, Section 8 (2) says if there is a larger public interest, then notwithstanding the exemption, information should still be given. But it has to be proved that there is a larger public interest. But these cases are very rare and very few commissioners are willing to stick their neck out.

Certain intelligence and security agencies which are identified by the government and are exempted under schedule 2 of the RTI act will not be covered except for a violation of human rights or corruption. These institutions, though part of the government, are exempted from the RTI, though I feel someday maybe we will see a change in the RTI Act.

Please share some practical tips for filing effective RTI applications.

Ideally, the shorter the RTI application, the more are your chances of getting information. And if you are asking a list of questions, most of them, I feel are counter-productive. Now, I am not talking about the law, the law does not prohibit you from writing a 100-page novel if you like. But please understand the PIO is also a normal human being like you and me.

In most cases, one can figure out what objective the RTI would be serving and hence the one can restrict the RTI to about 3-5 more focused queries.

A PIO is more likely to answer a short query, he is not too keen to answer long queries, and the first thing he wants is to put long queries away. For instance, if you ask 20 queries, the PIO also does not answer all of them and he might dodge the more important ones. What is important often gets missed.

I remember once an appellant in a case said he had not got the information he had asked for. His RTI application was 15 pages long, and the PIO had made a fair attempt to answer and to address them in about 25 pages of answers; he must have spent hours on it.

I asked the appellant what exact information he wanted. As a rule I refuse to go through 20 pages because there are many others as well. He then asked his question in 20 words and I directed the PIO to give the information he was seeking.

See, I was myself a very prolific user of RTI and must have filed 800-1,000 applications. 95 percent of the times my queries including name and address have been on one page.

All queries have a purpose in mind; think clearly what record which will lead to your query and think of your query in terms of a record, not a cross examinations. Many times, people get into taunting moods, nobody is listening to them.

One poor PIO is not the whole government. There is a lot of anger against the government and they pour it all out in the RTI, but it doesn't help. It puts off the person who is reading. Also, most importantly, the queries should be understandable. Sometimes, I cannot understand what is being said in long paragraphs.

I often suggest to first-timers to form a query and ask a friend who doesn't know what you are thinking. If he can't understand, then the PIO will also won't understand it. Keep it short and keep it focused.

What is the biggest problem being faced by the central and state information commissions' ?

It is the pendency of cases, especially in state commissions. The number of cases pending has already become 2-3 years in Orissa and I strongly feel that the time taken to dispose off cases should not take so long; it takes off the pressure off from PIO to give information.

You had once said that the selection of information commissioners is faulty. Why ?

Absolutely, I do believe that my selection is faulty. See, there is no proper process being followed. In fact, the selections of members in many committees -- women and children commission and minority commissions formed in the country are faulty.

A few influential people just decide randomly. I feel a proper and transparent system should be followed for the selection. These commissions are the checks and balances of our democracy and all of these are done by completely random and arbitrary processes.

Therefore, checks and balances of democracy do not function. And so, all citizens must demand for a transparent process. These are strong positions, and if people are chosen wisely, it can make a huge change, which right now is not happening.

What do you feel about information commissioner and higher judiciary declaring their assets publically ?

I wanted to declare my assets publically soon after I first joined, but it couldn't happen then. We brought this up again this year, and the current chief commissioner said all information commissioners should declare their assets, which was posted online a few months ago.

Judges are also declaring their assets, many of them are still not declaring, though. But this is how pressure is built up. At one time nobody did, only gradually people have started declaring their assets publically and many others are following them.

I had once received an RTI where the appellant wanted the assets of the President of India to be known publically. The PIO said he does not have such any such information, hence it could be given out.

As I had said, the information has to be existent to be given out. When the matter came before me, I put in a line there which read 'now that everybody is talking of transparency and the PM, ministers and judges have put up their assets publically, it would be nice if the President also considers doing it.'

I can't order the President; it is not in my powers. But in one month, the President has put up her assets. And now she has done it, subsequent Presidents will also keep doing it. This is how pressure is built up.

BJP wants Goa Lokayukta 2003 Bill to be tabled.

Zee News:Tuesday, September 26, 2011.

Panaji: State BJP on Monday said that rather than going for a new bill, the state government should table the Goa Lokayukta Bill 2003 during the forthcoming assembly session.
Leader of Opposition Manohar Parrikar, who met chief minister Digambar Kamat today, said that it has been suggested that the 2003 Bill, which needs certain amendments, should be tabled in the House, rather than tabling a new bill.
Goa state legislative assembly session will begin from October 5.

"The bill can be placed with certain modifications on the first day of the assembly and we assure the government that we will help them pass it on the second day," Parrikar told reporters here.
Even though the Goa State Law Commission has prepared a new Goa Lokayukta Bill, 2011 which was supposed to be placed before the session, the state Law Department has pointed out certain anomalies in the new bill.
During an interaction with the civil rights groups on Sunday in Goa, former Karnataka Lokayukta Santosh Hegde had also said that the state should place the old bill. "It will take almost two years, if the process is initiated afresh," he had said.
Goa Lokayukta Bill, 2003 was passed in the assembly in the year 2007 and referred to the Centre for the President's assent. However, it was referred back to the state government, as certain sections in it were clashing with the Right to Information Act (RTI).

When the RTI ‘Basmasura' chased the government.

The Hindu:Vidya Subrahmaniam:Tuesday, September 26, 2011.

When the controversial Finance Ministry note to the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) on P. Chidambaram's role in 2G spectrum allocation was traced to a Right to Information application, there was surprise and some concern both within the government and in RTI circles.

The government's discomfiture was understandable: The RTI Act, which was its proud creation, recoiled on it much like the boon that Lord Shiva granted Basmasura. In the fable, Basmasura seeks and gets the power to reduce to ashes anyone on whose head he places his hand. The Lord agrees, only to be chased around by Basmasura, who wants to test the boon on Shiva himself. From the Commonwealth Games to 2G, there has been an RTI angle to many of the scams and scandals that have emerged in recent times from the corridors of power. In the old days, a Finance Ministry note like the one that surfaced last week would have been a closely-held secret. Yet this document, used by the Bharatiya Janata Party as a weapon against both the Home Minister and the Prime Minister, was among a sheaf of papers released by the PMO itself. The irony is compounded by the fact that of the two applicants who sought the papers, one was R.K. Garg, convener of the BJP's RTI cell. The other was RTI veteran Subhash Chandra Agarwal.

The release of the note obviously placed the government in a quandary: It could hardly argue against its own decision. So while Pranab Mukherjee lauded the transparency of the RTI process in distant Washington, Veerappa Moily struck the first cautionary note. In a newspaper interview, he called for a national debate on the RTI, arguing that the Act could not be allowed to interfere in official decision-making. He also wheeled out the old chestnut of RTI amendments. RTI activists began to press the panic button. Activist Lokesh Batra sent out a message that said: “Alert, is this another attempt to dilute the RTI Act?”

The former Chief Information Commissioner, Wajahat Habibullah, who led the fight against amendments to outlaw file notings, told The Hindu that the RTI Act had acquired too much momentum for it now to be rolled back by the government. He said the Act provided for exemptions which the government could have used to deny information to the applicants. “Section 8 provides immunity from disclosure on grounds of national and economic security, privacy and commercial interest. The law does not become bad because the government chose to disclose information.”

Mr. Habibullah pointed to the vital role played by the RTI in digging out many of the recent scams. The CWG exposure started with a plea by the Organising Committee that it be kept out of the RTI. However, the Central Information Commission ruled that the OC was a public authority which allowed its spending to be scrutinised. This brought out a deluge of damning documents. Similarly, there were RTI queries on the procedure followed in spectrum allotment.

Nikhil Dey, convener of the National Campaign for People's Right to Information, said if the government attempted to roll back the RTI or bring in amendments, it would be an admission of its guilt: “That will immediately raise questions about its motives.” To Mr. Moily's charge that the RTI allowed normal inter-departmental discussions to be misinterpreted as dissensions, Mr. Dey said: “The best and most accurate interpretation can come only from full disclosure. It is only through full disclosure that you get a perspective of what happened. Leaks are far more selective and damaging.” He also argued that laws could not be enacted to make the government comfortable: “If the government feels some discomfort because of disclosure it is not a bad thing.”

Mr. Agarwal, who has brought out hundreds of secret documents from the vaults of the government, including correspondence between the Prime Minister and the President and between the Prime Minister and the Congress president, salutes Manmohan Singh and the PMO for upholding transparency: “With Ms. Gandhi and civil society watching, a rollback is almost ruled out. If despite this, the government dilutes the Act, it will have to pay a heavy price for it.”

Local domain names to widen internet reach.

Business Standard:Manish Dalal:Tuesday, September 26, 2011.

The Right to Information (RTI) Act of India, 2005, advises public authorities to provide as much information as possible to the public through various means of communication. It mandates the use of the internet as one such communication tool in making information available and accessible to all.

However, in India, the digital divide continues to be a challenge. In spite of a population of over a billion people, the total number of users accessing the internet is only around 100 million, less than 10 per cent of the entire population. Also, nearly 72 per cent of the pages on the internet are in English, while around 77 per cent of the population comprises non-English speakers. This makes the access of a predominantly English internet non-intuitive and often difficult.

Internationalised domain names (IDNs), scheduled for launch in the second half of 2011, are expected to change this trend. IDNs are domain names, or web addresses, in local languages. Historically, domain names contain American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII) characters. This means domain names have used the English alphabet (a,b,c…z), numbers (0, 1…9) and the hyphen (-). While web content in various languages has been around for a long time, domain name addresses in local language scripts were launched two years ago. In October 2009, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers announced the launch of IDN country code top-level domains (ccTLDs), written entirely in local languages.

The domain name is a critical way to locate resources on the internet, and IDNs make the internet more accessible for non-English speaking countries by allowing users to access the internet in their local language. As of June, 26 countries had received one or more IDNs. India has already the passed the string evaluation phase and has entered the final phase of delegation approval by the ICAAN board for the launch of the new TLD.bharat in seven Indian languages Hindi, Bengali, Punjabi, Urdu, Tamil, Telugu and Gujarati.

The primary reason why IDNs are important is the growing number of internet users around the world, who find it difficult to recognise and use ASCII characters and reproduce them on keyboards or use software to enter website addresses in browsers. Over the last decade, the internet has internationalised its audience and has provided a platform for services beyond those targeted at speakers of Latin-based languages. IDNs are expected to offer the entire internet ecosystem government/policymakers, registrars, businesses and consumers new opportunities to explore, gain access and grow.

IDNs would significantly enhance user experience and may make it possible for more people to access the internet with greater ease. With IDNs, people all over the world would be able to type domain names in the languages they are familiar with. Businesses may be able to advertise their websites in local languages, ensuring effective targeting. By adding IDNs, domain name registrars would gain the opportunity to expand registration services and potentially increase revenues with their existing infrastructure. As internet usage grows with the use of IDNs, the promise of its impact on social and economic development in India, increases manifold.

The author is vice-president (Asia-Pacific), Verisign Naming Services)

Get familiarized with RTI Act: CIC to PIOs

GreaterKashmir.com:Tuesday, September 26, 2011.

Doda, Sep 26: The Chief Information Commissioner, G R Sofi today urged the Public Information Officers (PIOs) to familiarize themselves with the RTI Act for bringing transparency in public working.
The CIC was addressing the Public Information Officers and Ist Appellate Authorities (AAs) here today.
Speaking on the occasion, the CIC urged the PIOs/First AAs to fully familiarize themselves with the RTI Act particularly those sections which have a direct bearing on their role. “PIOs and AAs are the pillars of the RTI Act and they are expected to make it a success and actively contribute in bringing transparency in the public working. No doubt we are in early stage of implementation of the Act, but there is no option than to implement it by putting in our sincere efforts,” the CIC said.
He appealed to the bureaucracy and public authorities to implement the Act in letter and spirit so that “wishes of the law makers who represent the people are fulfilled.”
The CIC reiterated that the Act empowers people residing in the State to seek information from PIOs of Public Authorities. “And this right of the people has to be respected. A PIO derives powers directly from the Act to dispose of the RTI applications independently. It is the PIO who becomes a principle stakeholder in the scheme of transparency law,” he said.
During the interactive session, the CIC replied to a number of queries raised by PIOs and tried to remove doubts which hamper disposal of applications. The CIC however expressed displeasure on hearing from some PIOs that they have not obtained the copy of the Act.
“It is bounden duty of the PIOs to go through the Act as they have to pass orders in keeping with its provisions,” he said.
Later, the Court of the Commission was also held at Dak Bungalow Doda and six complaints of district Doda were decided by the CIC on spot after hearing the applicants and concerned PIOs and FAA.

Anna wave likely to affect Congress, says union minister.

Daily Bhaskar:Tuesday, September 26, 2011.

Pune: Congress leader and union Minister of State for Coal Pratik Patil, on Monday, said the party would suffer in the ensuing elections to local self-government bodies due to the anti-corruption movement launched by Gandhian, Anna Hazare.

He was speaking at the party convention for the region comprising Pune, Satara, Sangli, Kolhapur and Solapur districts organised in the city.

Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan; Maharashtra Pradesh Congress Committee (MPCC) president Manikrao Thakare; Shivajirao Deshmukh, speaker of the state legislative council; and state Cooperatives Minister Harshwardhan Patil were present.

The state would go to polls for 10 municipal corporations, 27 zilla parishads and numerous panchayat samitis under them, as well as 168 municipal councils by the end of this year and early in 2012. The convention was organised in the city to assess opinions of party office-bearers in Western Maharashtra.

Wondering whether the party activists would be able to answer them convincingly, Patil said that the citizens would raise questions regarding scams exposed in the central government following Hazare's anti-graft campaign.

Supporting Hazare's movement, Patil said that he would launch a campaign from October 2 to free Sangli, his home district, from the menace of corruption. "Politicians are blamed for corruption but they are few in numbers. The origin of corruption is among the public and it should be nipped in the bud," he said.

Shivajirao Deshmukh, a member of the Congress working committee (CWC) the highest decision-making body in the party echoed Patil's views. He said that people saw Ramayan on Ramlila Maidan on the issue of corruption.

Chavan said that many scams had been uncovered due to the Right To Information (RTI) Act, 2005 (RTI). Congress leader Sonia Gandhi and the party should be given credit for introducing RTI to ensure transparency in governance.

Speaking at a press conference later, Thakare said that the party activists need not be afraid of the impact of Hazare's agitation or influence of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP). He said people have elected the Congress in the past also, when there were attempts to defame the party.

Politicians go to war over allegations of illegal mining.

The Times of India:Tuesday, September 26, 2011.

PANAJI: A political war of words erupted on Monday between opposition leader Manohar Parrikar, and ministers Vishwajit Rane (health) and Joaquim Alemao (urban development), as the former held the two ministers responsible for illegal mining in the state.

Speaking to media persons Parrikar said, "This government and ministers in this government, whether Vishwajit Rane or Joaquim Alemao, are in some way or the other responsible for illegal mining in the state and they cannot escape the responsibility. We demand an independent inquiry committee appointed by the Supreme Court or CBI to investigate this matter."

He also said political patronage has led to illegal mining. "One politician from Sattari is reported to be demanding 50 per tonne for lifting dumps from his area," Parrikar said. He didn't name the politician.

He also said the police failed to act on a complaint of illegal extraction of iron ore at Ambelim in Sattari, where around 1 to 1.5 lakh tonnes of iron ore were transported from Ambelim lake and machinery was seized following the complaint but police have not inquired into the issue, which indicates strong political patronage. "Obviously everyone knows who can afford to give political patronage in Sattari," Parrikar said.

Parrikar said based on the documents collected through RTI and answers to assembly questions it is clear that a boom in international market led to illegal mining in Goa. "Since then mining illegalities have been shadowing legal mining activities by 40 to 50%," he said. Parrikar stated that illegal mining in Goa is around 15% to 20% more than in Karnataka.

Parrikar also said that the public account committee (PAC), of which he is chairman, will complete its final report by October 3 or 4. "One of the paras in the report is on mining, obviously in that para there is reference to the royalty loss on 10.9 million tonnes of exported iron ore," Parrikar said.

Reacting to the Mormugao Port Trust (MPT) statement that they will not allow illegal ore to be exported, Parrikar questioned how MPT exported illegal iron ore during the last two years.

Ministers defend release of finance ministry’s 2G note.

Hindustan Times:Tuesday, September 26, 2011.

As the UPA government continues to battle a belligerent opposition slamming the government in the 2G spectrum allocation scam, law minister Salman Khurshid and personnel minister V Narayanasamy defended the decision to release the controversial finance ministry note under the transparency law.

The note had implied that the then finance minister P Chidambaram did not stick to his position that the 2G spectrum should have been auctioned. Former telecom minister A Raja and several government and private officials are in jail on corruption charges in allocation of spectrum.

Narayanasamy, the minister incharge of department of personnel, said any document sought under the transparency law in accordance with the right to information act, had to be given.

Khurshid agreed to suggestions that the information law had been misused by some people in the past and had led to needless controversies.

“But you have to weigh misuse with usefulness of the RTI Act. We would like our life to be miserable than the life of a citizen,” Khurshid said, obliquely referring to the controversy that remained in the headlines for nearly a week.

Asked if this was the toughest birthday for the prime minister, Khurshid said, “the true quality of a person is known only when every step is challenging and tough”.

“The Prime Minister is a man with a grip of steel in a silken glove,” he said, describing Singh as very charming and firm. The law minister acknowledged there were challenges but “we are all here together”.

“We welcome any test that we are put to... we will come through. And we will give this country a government that this country will be proud of,” he said.

Open drainage still remains an elusive dream; Nearly 200 families are facing health hazards and unnecessary expenditure.

The Hindu: K.Manikandan:Tambaram:Monday, September 25, 2011.

Over four years after money was remitted to the Municipality for the construction of an open drainage, the work remains incomplete, on Dargah Road in Pallavaram. This has resulted in nearly 200 families facing health hazards on account of the unhygienic conditions.

There are 182 apartments in Chitra Township, Phase I, on Dargah Road in Pallavaram. Before taking possession of their apartments, the owners had paid Rs.30,000 each to the builder as “drainage and water charges.” While the amount collected was nearly Rs.55 lakh, a sum of Rs.13.4 lakh was paid to the municipality by the builder for construction of an open drainage outside the apartment to transport grey water generated from bathrooms and kitchens.

It was paid in March 2007 and a response from the Municipality, sought under the RTI Act by the residents, acknowledges the same.

Though it has been more than four years since then, the municipal administration is yet to provide the drain. As a result, grey water from all the apartments stagnates in the southern and eastern ends of the complex, making it look like a reservoir. “We have been fighting for the past four years. Last month, we met top officials of the Department of Municipal Administration and Water Supply and those at the Directorate of Municipal Administration. They promised to build the drain in a week, but there has been no response so far,” said Vasantha Viswanathan, a resident at the township.

Pointing to the continuous overflow of grey water from the underground sumps, Ms. Vasantha said it was a severe health hazard. They were forced to hire at least six tankers on an average everyday. They spent anywhere between Rs. 75,000 and Rs. 1.5 lakh a month for this purpose. In the absence of a treatment plant, they had to hire tankers to clear sewage too.

A public well, that was pristine pure when they moved into the complex four years ago had become completely contaminated.

They had been at the receiving end of criticisms from other localities in Dargah Road for no fault of theirs when rainwater washed away the grey water into neighbouring areas during the monsoon.

S.Vanamamalai, a former senior defence lawyer with a State government police agency, said the local body was now asking them to pay Rs.10,000 as deposit for the household service connections of the underground drainage project and another Rs.5,000 for the water supply improvement project.

“We are at a loss now, as we had already paid twice the sum to the builder for the purpose.”

Engineers at the Department of MAWS said steps were being taken to provide remedial measures .

On the delay , they said procedural hassles had shelved the work and hoped that it would be taken up at the earliest.

CIC directs AIIMS to release MBBS entrance question archives.

Firstpost:Monday,September 25, 2011.

New Delhi: The Central Information Commission has directed the All India Institute of Medical Sciences in New Delhi to make public archives of its question papers for MBBS entrance examination for the past 20 years.

The direction came after the premier medical institute objected to the disclosure of information to a RTI applicant, saying the question papers were original “literary” works of experts, the copyright of which was vested with the AIIMS.

Citing exemption clauses of the transparency law, the AIIMS said it was under no obligation to disclose them unless larger public warrants them to be disclosed. It also said experts who prepared these papers had special rights as per Copyrights Act and the institute was protecting these rights.

It also said making these papers were held in fiduciary capacity with AIIMS by the experts who prepared them, hence cannot be disclosed. The institute also raised apprehension that these question papers might be used for commercial purposes.

Rejecting the contentions of the AIIMS, Information Commissioner said exemption clause of the RTI Act regarding copyright information is attracted only when disclosure would harm competitive position of third party and not of the medical institute itself.

“It is apparent that AIIMS is not a commercial body that competes with other organisations. Further, it is stated that question papers are prepared by experts for AIIMS. It does not appear that these experts are in a competitive business such that disclosure of these question papers along with their keys could harm their competitive position,” Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi pointed out.

The CIC also rejected the arguments that since these question papers were held by AIIMS in fiduciary capacity, they should be withheld from disclosure.

Gandhi said all relationships usually have an element of trust but all cannot be classified as fiduciary.

“Information provided in discharge of statutory requirement, or to obtain a job, or to get a license, cannot be considered to have been given in a fiduciary relationship.

In the present matter, since question papers are prepared by experts for AIIMS, there may be some element of trust between such experts and AIIMS,” he said.

However, there does not appear to be a fiduciary relationship between experts and AIIMS where the latter is required to act for the benefit of the former, Gandhi said.

He said AIIMS has raised certain “ancillary contention” that disclosure may serve commercial interest of few persons.

“The Commission is of the considered view that whether disclosure of information would serve the commercial interest would necessarily entail examination of the purpose for seeking information, which is prohibited under section 6(2) of the RTI Act,” he said.

According to AIIMS, the question bank was limited and if it is disclosed, questions will no longer remain a secret, which would be a compromise on the high standards of selection procedure and selection of meritorious students.

But the CIC rejected the argument, saying according to the RTI Act, information could only be denied on the basis of clauses given in the law.

“These addition contentions…do not come within the purview of section eight and nine of the RTI Act and therefore not tenable,” he said, ordering to make the disclosure before 10 October.

Transgressions of an Act.

Livemint:Monday,September 25, 2011.

In almost all instances, what is feared is the disclosure of “damaging” information information that shows official lapses. Looked from another vantage, if officials have not done any wrong, they should have no fear at the release of such facts.

Six years after it was passed, the Right to Information (RTI) Act evokes contrasting feelings. Among politicians and in officialdom, suspicion and hostility are dominant moods. Among citizens, hope and despair in almost equal measure are quite evident. It is against this backdrop that the Act’s future and its potential must be seen.

The RTI’s chief weakness can be seen at the ground level.

Citizens from rural areas often disempowered in information terms still have to wage an uphill battle to get the facts they seek. At the level of panchayats, sub-divisional offices and thanas, the niceties of the RTI framework are virtually non-existent. Activists have been killed or hounded for seeking information that is damaging.

At higher administrative levels in state capitals and at the national level the picture is somewhat brighter, but just so. Here, the release of “damaging” information is often picked up by news channels and papers and the ability of officials to prevent the flow of information openly is limited. They have, however, found a way to check activists. Exceptions under the Act, even if it is clear they don’t apply, are employed to take cases all the way up to the Central Information Commission (CIC).

Seen in this light, the difference between the two levels is only of degrees and not substance. If anything, a “debate” is being sought on the functioning of the RTI disclosure of information, it is held, is impairing the functioning of government.

This is a contemptible argument and deserves to be set aside.

In almost all instances, what is feared is the disclosure of “damaging” information information that shows official lapses. Looked from another vantage, if officials have not done any wrong, they should have no fear at the release of such facts. If anything, the vigilant information commissioners both at the state and the national levels are capable of disciplining those who seek to misuse such information. That, however, is not the issue it is only an excuse.

The heart of the matter is that officials and politicians alike were unprepared for facing the RTI. If anything, they assumed that it would be another innovation that could be snared in red tape. Now that this has not happened, excuses are being proffered to dilute the ambit of the RTI.

The right approach would be for senior leaders to realize that information can no longer be withheld from those who need it in a costless manner. If the RTI Act is diluted, it will only lead to protests and upheaval.

Is the RTI Act impeding the functioning of governments? Tell us at views@livemint.com