Bar & Bench: New Delhi: Wednesday,
September 12, 2018.
An affidavit filed in the Supreme Court
in the matter related to the appointment of officers to the Central Information
Commission (CIC) states that the Central government is “fully committed to
implement the RTI Act”.
However, if the content of the rest of
the affidavit is anything to go by, one may question the veracity of the above
statement.
Given the Centre’s failure to fill up
vacancies in the CIC, a petition came to be filed before the Supreme Court by
RTI activist Anjali Bhardwaj and advocate Prashant Bhushan, among others.
The CIC, which is supposed to have one
Chief Information Commissioner and ten Information Commissioners, is currently
functioning with four vacancies. To make matters worse, by December this year,
four more members will retire, including Chief Information Commissioner Radha
Krishna Mathur.
When the matter came up for hearing
before Justices AK Sikri and Ashok Bhushan on July 27, the Centre was directed
to file an affidavit indicating how many posts it proposes to fill up, as well
as the time schedule within which the posts are to be filled up.
Apart from this, the Centre was also
directed to reveal why it did not make any appointments to the CIC pursuant to
an advertisement made back in 2016. Moreover, the Court also directed the
Centre to give its response to a few prayers made in the petition, including
revealing a short list of candidates.
In its affidavit filed on August 27, the
Centre has stated it has published an advertisement calling for applications
for the posts of Information Commissioners in the Central Information
Commission at New Delhi.
The advertisement reveals that the Centre
is currently advertising for only four posts. Given the fact that four other
officers will retire by December – and assuming that the four current vacancies
are filled by then – the CIC will find itself in exactly the same situation it
faces now. Worse still, come December, we could see the CIC functioning without
a head.
On a positive note, the affidavit states
that the composition of the Selection Committee has been finalized.
However, the Centre has been loath to
reveal the time schedule as per which this Committee will complete the
appointment process. The affidavit states,
“…in the RTI Act, a specific time frame
has not been stipulated for submission of recommendations by the Selection
Committee…
…when the application process is still on
and it is not known as to how many applications would be received, the precise
time schedule within which the posts are to be filled up is difficult to be
indicated.”
This statement must prompt a sense of
déjà vu for the Supreme Court, having been acquainted with the government’s
attitude towards processing judicial appointments to the high courts. The
abject delay in approving Collegium recommendations has prompted strikes in
courts across the country, and a petition filed in the Supreme Court calling
for a detailed timeframe to be implemented for processing appointments.
Perhaps something on similar lines is
needed for appointments to the CIC. In any case, it will be interesting to see
how the Bench reacts to this statement made by the Centre. However, as per the
Supreme Court website, the matter is listed next for December 3. By then, the
damage could already be done.
As regards its failure to make
appointments pursuant to a 2016 advertisement, the Centre has included in the
affidavit an extremely vague reply. Suffice to say, it does not answer the
question.
Quite surprisingly, the affidavit instead
makes a reference to the Centre’s intention to amend the RTI Act, a move that
has not gone down well with civil society. The affidavit states,
“A process for amendment of the Right to
Information Act, 2005 was also initiated to incorporate express/specific
enabling provisions for determining the term of ‘office’, salaries and
allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of the Chief
Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners of the Central
Information Commission and Chief State Information Commissioners and State
Information Commissioners.
The aforesaid selection process was not
pursued pending the outcome of the process for amendment of the Act.”
And as per RTI activist Anjali Bhardwaj,
this is the reason why the Centre has not filled the vacancies in the CIC.
The affidavit filed in the Supreme Court
betrays a lack of intention on the part of the Centre to be transparent about
the process that would ensure that the highest authority for RTI applications
in the country is adequately manned.
One cannot help but second guess the
Centre’s level of commitment to the implementation of the RTI Act.