The
Hindu: Hyderabad: Monday, October 22, 2012.
Speakers at a
meeting on the Supreme Court judgment on Right to Information (RTI) have said
the recent verdict in Namit Sharma case will adversely impact the
implementation of the Act in its true spirit. The meeting requested the apex
court to review its decision keeping in view the successful experience of RTI
for the last seven years.
Speaking at a
meeting organised by the United Forum for RTI Campaign-AP (UFRTI) here on
Saturday, former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court, Justice A. Laxman Rao
and former judge of Andhra Pradesh High Court Justice Reddappa Reddy felt that
the Supreme Court direction that appeals in the State and Central Information
Commissions should be heard by two-member Benches comprising Information
Commissioners (ICs) from judicial and expert backgrounds would be highly
disadvantageous as it would increase the pendency of appeals considerably. They
opined that prescribing qualifications should be left to Parliament/Assembly
instead of deciding it in consultation with the Apex Court/High Court. They
suggested that Parliament could amend Sections 12 (V) and 15 (V) of the RTI Act
to fix qualifications.
The RTI Act
had never breached privacy of individuals during the last seven years of its
experience and the efforts to impose curbs on petitions in the name of privacy
would only dilute the act, Magsaysay award winner Sandeep Pandey said. Citing
an example he stated that the petition filed seeking information on public
spending on UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi’s health did not seek the details of
her illness.
Director
General of Centre for Good Governance and former Central Information
Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi said amendments to the RTI Act would facilitate
the Supreme Court to dispose the review petition early.
Convenor of
UFRTI B. Ramakrishnam Raju said only those who were pricked by the capability
of RTI were talking about curbs on it. The forum would write to the Centre and
Supreme Court stating that the judgment would do no good to RTI, he stated.
.JPG)
.JPG)
