Greater Kashmir: Tuesday, February 3, 2016.
From the last almost seven years Right to Information Act (RTI) is enforced in Jammu & Kashmir state. Even after so many years of enactment of this act, the designated Public Information Officers (PIOs), and First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) continue to violate J&K RTI Act 2009. On the other hand there are many information seekers who get information under RTI but never make it public or use it positively. Some information seekers calling themselves activists, have been using RTI Act from last several years, but nobody knows what they do with the official information? Neither the information is disseminated through print or electronic media nor is any case filed before the competent authorities like Vigilance Commission, Crime Branch etc.
Preamble of RTI Act :
The preamble of J&K RTI Act 2009 clearly says that this act is supposed to provide for setting out the regime of Right to Information in order to promote transparency and accountability. The preamble reads as : “An Act to provide for setting out the regime of right to information for the people of the State to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority, the constitution of a state Information Commission and-for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto”. After the intervention of State Information Commission (SIC) the majority of the information seekers get the requisite information, but after getting the said information most of these information seekers hardly use the information for public good which goes against the preamble of RTI Act.
SIC’s direction against RTI user:
With an aim of checking the misuse of Right to Information Act (RTI), the State Chief Information Commissioner (SCIC) G R Sufi, recently issued a significant order wherein he directed a habitual RTI information seeker from Mahore, district Reasi, to give details to commission about the use of information he collected under RTI Act from last 4 years. The RTI user namely Mohammad Ayub Ayan has been using RTI from last several years but according to SIC he has hardly used the information which could ensure transparency and accountability within the public authorities. The said information seeker didn’t even attend the final hearing before State Chief Information Commissioner on 27th January 2016. The appellant neither sent his representative or a written application for the cause of his absence. The information seeker wanted some vital information from Tehsildar of Mahore who too violated the RTI act by not providing him the information within stipulated time. Even after filing the appeal before the concerned SDM, the information was not provided to Ayub Ayan. It was only after the intervention of SIC, the information was provided. The State Chief Information Commissioner (SCIC), in addition of asking the appellant to submit his details as to how he used the RTI information from last 4 years also shot a penalty show cause notice to the PIO cum Tehsildar Mahore. The SDM was also cautioned of departmental action by Chief Information Commissioner, thus balancing this whole case. The order reads: “Information seeker Sh. Mohammad Ayub Ayan is also advised to let this Commission know what has been the use of information received by him after invoking his right to information for the last 4 years. This direction is given in accordance with the preamble of Jammu & Kashmir Right to Information Act, 2009”
Conclusion:
There is a group of RTI activists who have been saying that Information Commission cannot ask an RTI user about the details of using the information, but in view of growing cases of pressure tactics and alleged blackmailing by some RTI information seekers, I personally feel that State Information Commission’s order is justified. Let us make positive use of RTI by bringing the information into public domain through mainstream or at least social media once we get some vital details by invoking RTI Act. Those who seek information and do not make it public have some motives other than ensuring transparency; such black-sheep should be identified and taken to task.
.JPG)
.JPG)
