Steel flyover: anti-people, anti-democracy, now anti-RTI Act

Deccan Herald‎: Bengaluru: Sunday, October 23, 2016.

Almost 11 years after the enactment of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, secrecy over government decisions seems to have increased manifold.

Denial of information on various grounds, including invasion of privacy and other sections of the RTI Act has not only defeated the purpose of the Act but also helped scams go undetected.

RTI activists in the City say that the information officers at various departments have consistently denied vital information about big infrastructure projects in the last one decade.

M V K Anil Kumar, an RTI activist, and also one of the trustees of Karnataka Right to Information activists’ forum `KRIA-KATTE’, had this to say: Projects reach finality by the time legally available ways to challenge rejection of an RTI application reach the logical end.

Governments always ensure that the public don’t get any information easily. Take the international airport project and the subsequent elevated road project for example. "We had to wait years together for certain vital information on the preliminary and final notification for the Bangalore International Airport Project," he recalls.

He adds, "Our applications were rejected stating a PPP (public-private partnership) model contract does not come under the RTI. We challenged it stating that when the lands were given by the state government at a subsidised price and also certain tax exemptions were offered, how can authorities deny information to the public?"

The case reached some kind of finality when the High Court upheld our argument that even PPP model projects come under the RTI. The project was, however completed by then,’’ he notes.

According to Kumar, it was the people of Karnataka who were denied information. The draft notification had no mention that there could not be another airport within a certain radius of the international airport.

There are a certain common sections or exemption clauses in the RTI Act that the authorities exploit while refusing to part with the information. ``The common quoted sections for denial are 8 (1) (h) - impedes investigation though the investigations would have completed long ago, sections 8 (1) (j) and 11 - invasion of privacy of a public servant though information will be about his official activities. Even if one question is denied under 8 (1), the entire application is denied, thus violating section 10 (1) of the Act."

Further, complaints are not entertained even by the State Information Commission under section 18. "Besides, there are instances of the appellants being asked to file a second appeal under section 19, thus nullifying RTI Act with no fear of punishment to the Government Officers,’’ says Adarsh R Iyer, co-president of Janaadhiakara Sangharsha Parishath, an NGO.