Section 4 of RTI Act could have prevented Adarsh scam, say activists

Anil Singh, TNN, Nov, 2010,

MUMBAI: The Adarsh housing society scam would not have been possible if the government had implemented Section 4 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, which calls for mandatory disclosure by public bodies, say RTI activists who have come together to form a statewide RTI Council to act as a pressure group.

Basically, the Section 4 prescribes 'say what you do'. This means that government bodies must publicise the entire decision-making process, which includes the manuals referred to by the bureaucrats.

"Once the government states this, citizens can spot any deviations. This would also make it difficult for government officers to act arbitrarily," said Central Information Commissioner (CIC) Shailesh Gandhi.

"Under Section 4, the details of Adarsh housing society would have to be posted on the internet by the BMC's chief assessor and collector," said Bhaskar Prabhu of the Mahiti Adhikar Manch, Mumbai.

As CIC, Gandhi has used Section 4 to order the registrar of cooperative societies to issue details of societies, which have submitted their audited balance sheets, and those who have not. He has also directed the Delhi municipal corporation to give details of building plans being submitted for approval, widows' pensions and details of the corporators' and legislators' funds being spent on each project.

Citing an example where Section 4 can help, Prabhu says that the CM's Relief Fund is availiable to individuals also but no information has been posted on the government website about how the citizen can go about applying for it. Likewise, details of several social welfare and poverty alleviation schemes can be posted on government websites.

Prabhu, along with RTI activist Shivaji Raut from Satara and Vijay Kumbhar of the Surajya Sangharsh Samiti, Pune, are the convenors of the RTI Council, which will have representatives in all the 36 districts.

Organisations such as the Bombay Chartered Accountants Society, Public Concern for Governance Trust and the Tata Institute of Social Sciences have also pledged help to the Council.

Section 4 (1) (b) lists 17 categories of information which have to declared suo motu by public authorities.

However, most organisations only provide only sketchy details. Hindustan Petroleum and Bharat Petroleum are the two exceptions.

According to Gandhi, progress on Section 4 has been very tardy so far since nobody has taken ownership of getting it implemented. "I believe this responsibility must be taken up by the Information Commissions," he said.