What does the young India think about the RTI Act?
8 Dec, 2012The site http://www.rtifoundationofindia.com/ organsied a competition for the law students in the country wherein entries were invited on the topic "Lacunae in the RTI Act, 2005". The following are the excerpts from some of the articles sent by the law students from all over the country. They are arranged in a random order.
We, as the citizens of the world’s largest democracy are yet to realise that our country is a storehouse of valuable information which could change our lives forever. Are we able to make most of the opportunities that lay before us? It’s time that we’ve risen up to the challenges of filtering out the useful data from the useless one and to devote it for empowerment of our citizenry. Often the conundrum of data glut or information overload let our focus go away form the information that's important. When we seek information exercising our statutory right to do, we are presented with loads of incomprehensible data running over hundreds of pages. It more often than not nullifies the very reasons why we have approached the concerned public authority.
What are the modes of data visualisation that the public and the government can utilise to enhance their standards of living? Information around us can be packed in the form of Static Infographics, Interactive Online Dashboards, Statistical Analysis, Threat Assessment, Comparison Tools, Data Mash up Tools would help the administration to tell public what they want to say (or what they don’t want to say) in a much more compelling manner.
Gautam Jayasurya, 5th Year B.A LLB (Hons), Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Patiala - 147001 (Punjab)
“The Right to know is not meant for gratifying idle curiosity or mere inquisitiveness but is essential for the effective functioning of democracy. Transparency and accountability are sine qua non in a genuine democracy” - Mr. Soli Sorabjee
How well can the so called lawyers in the Government save themselves and their political economies by excluding private parties out of the said Act. The definition of the term public authority should rationally be all those institutions that have forbearance with public, why not such a broad scope, multitude of litigations would be the obvious answer for the lazy fellows in the helm of affairs and a counter of parallel framework to that of courts to resolve such issues the very answer to it. This goes on and on until the element of ‘greed’ in human nature continues- eternity!!!
A three tier approach to solve this menace of ineffectiveness of RTI Act is indispensable. The first is to trim procedural requirements for disposing of complaints. A second approach is to increase the penalties for noncompliance to compensate for the perverse incentives caused by backlogs. A third way of breaking the cycle would be for commissions to address systemic problems directly. Internet as a medium must be used extensively for dissemination of Information.
Param Pandya, B. Com LL.B (Hons.), Third year Undergraduate Student, Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar
No proper procedure for selection (of Information Commissioners)
The Act does not lay down any procedure for inviting and processing nominations. , there is no stipulated time frame for decision by the CIC or the SIC of a second appeal under section 19(3) A second appeal against the decision under sub-section (1) shall lie within ninety days from the date on which the decision should have been made or was actually received, with the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission: Provided that the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may admit the appeal after the expiry of the period of ninety days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. of the Act. Consequently, people have no option but to wait patiently for the decision of the CIC or the SIC before they can take judicial action in the matter.
An overwhelming number of PIOs -- nodal officers who receive and dispense with RTI applications -- cite lack of training and unfamiliarity with the law as key hurdles in their ability to effectively service RTI requests. Not just resident Indians, non-resident Indians (NRIs) too complain of obstacles in exercising their right to seek information.
Three years after notification of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the government still had not specified the procedure for remitting fees (for NRI). In addition, it is extremely cumbersome of NRIs to file and receive acknowledgments for RTI applications filed with various central and state public authorities.
When PIOs were appointed to embassies, NRIs hoped they would follow the express provision in Section 6 (3) of the RTI Act, stating that if the subject matter of an application addressed to a public authority actually relates to another, then the former has to transfer it to the latter within five days. Unfortunately that did not happen.
Raj Kumar Borborua Class: IV th year (7th semester), Bangalore Institute of Legal Studies, Bangalore-560004
Section 4 of the RTI Act says that government authorities ought to voluntarily and ‘suo motu’ disclose information. However, this provision is unclear as to who will be held accountable for disclosing of the information, in case the government authorities do not act on the request.
Furthermore, the Act must lay down some high qualifications required for different officials such as the Information Commissioner. On 13 September 2012 in the case of Namit Sharma v Union of India the Supreme Court held that only a sitting or retired Chief Justice of a High Court or a Supreme Court judge could head the Central and State Information Commissions.
Also, the power given to various government authorities to make rules regarding RTI has led to numerous fee rules.
Mr. Vikrant Dayanand Shetty, V-III (Third Year of Five Year Law Course), Government Law College, Mumbai- 400 020, Maharashtra.
An RTI request is much more likely to obtain the required information if it is of a general nature. Requests for information are more successful when the government department has not showing interest for giving the information.
Dheeraj Singhal, 2nd Year, III Sem, Faculty of Law, BHU
“The Right to Information Act” became operational on 12th October, 2005. This law empowered Indian citizens to seek information from Public Authorities, thus making the Government and its functionaries more accountable and responsible. Unlike many other countries (for e.g. UK) which took several years to operationalise the Act post the enactment, India took only a few months to bring it into force.
RTI has also been found to be an expensive prospect for the bureaucracy because the material for the information sought has to be paid in cash of Rs.2 for each paper and while filing an application under the right to information a person has to pay Rs.10.
Many public authorities are not forthcoming with their proactive disclosure documents on certain categories of information listed under the Act.
Akanksha, 3rd Year (Final Year), Vth Semester, Law School, Banaras Hindu University, Uttar Pradesh.
In today’s highly-networked world where the internet culture has made a transition from obscurity to ubiquity, one of the most prominent indicators of the societal acknowledgment or recognition of an issue is whether there exists an exclusive ‘wiki’ or Wikipedia page devoted to it. Thus, there is no surprise that issues like the ‘2G spectrum scam’, the ‘Coal Mining scam’ and the ‘Commonwealth Games scam’ have exclusive pages devoted to them. However, a more surprising entry in the widely-read international encyclopaedia is the page relating to the ‘Attacks on RTI activists in India’4. The element of surprise in this regard is on account of the actual extent and prevalence of a problem that has hitherto been regarded as being merely a sporadic cause for concern.
The Act makes no specific provision for anonymous or pseudonymous applications. I feel that this is one of the most serious lacunae in the present working of the Act. Rather than there existing a specific prohibition against such applications, there is no specific provision permitting them. The above trend of violence against RTI Activists and applicants in general can be significantly mitigated if there is an element of non-traceability of applications to specific individuals. Concomitant with such a move towards anonymity, there must be a move towards curbing frivolous applications.
Tarun Krishnakumar, 3rd Year, B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), National Law School of India, Bangalore.
A large number of Indian population still struggle with harnessing the bare minimum resources. Under such a circumstance, to think that majority of people have strong moral convictions, strong enough not to share the information with a third party in ways that it can not be misused, would be perhaps, over judging their judiciousness.
Under the Right to Information, there is no provision to check the credentials, background, particulars etc for every person who comes to gather the information. And so, the chances that this information can be exploited by an external agency are rather high. And the Government, understanding the sensitivities of the matter, would certainly not want to harm itself. An alternative way out can be taking affidavit from the people seeking information, so that at least there is some form of credibility and responsibility on part of the person.
Vivek Dixit, KLE Society Law College, Bangalore
Many times the questions relating to old information are asked in the same application, sometimes of different nature too, which creates a problem for the public information officer to answer. Hence proper provisions and a systematic method should be adopted for obtaining such information.
Though, if it is agreed that the government has adopted the PPP (public private partnership) Model as a weapon for rapid development of Nation, then the Right ti Information Act shall also be provided against Private Enterprises & corporations because they too have Shares & Interests in National Properties & Resources. They too use the money of general public & use the capital.
Bhawna Upadhyaya
Despite of all its merits, RTI Act only confers rights but does not prescribe any duties. Although there have been demands that certain duties and responsibilities should also be incorporated in the Act. Also no additional resources, which include manpower, were being provided to the central and the State agencies to implement the Act. There is no provision of discouraging annoying and vexatious demands which deprive genuine information seekers. There also an issue of large number of RTI cases pending at various levels. Thus there is a need of reducing pendency of cases at all levels lest the law seems to be ineffective and dead. The government spends a lot of money for disposal of a case and therefore there is also a need for evolving cost effective strategy and capacity building to handle this increased load.
Therefore if education is not fully widespread and people are not fully aware about the possibilities under the Act, it would just remain on paper and will not turn into actuality. There are restrictions on accessing information pertaining to security, foreign policy, defence, law enforcement and public safety which are quite standard but the Right to Information Act also excludes cabinet papers, including records of the council of ministers and other officials effectively shields the whole process of decision making from compulsory disclosure.
Now, pointing out some faults in the clauses itself:-
- Firstly, Clause 5 of the RTI Act gives an obligation to the public authority to designate Public Information Officer (P.I.O). Adding to that the Act has not prescribed any criteria or qualification for the P.I.O. to designate. As a result, there are so many public offices all over where the employees are working in a clerical cadre and thereby contributing to the fault in the Act.
- Secondly, Clause 6 of the RTI Act does not specify or limits the quantum of information to be gained by an individual or a group of people i.e. Association/Organization, nor its requirement or necessity.
- Section 26 of the Act says that government should educate the masses about the RTI act but this isn’t actually happening effectively.
- Section4 says that there should be computerization of records which in actuality is not happening.
- Section 4(1) b talks about the Proactive Disclosure which is also not dynamic in nature and not periodically updated. It just becomes a mere paper formality.
- Section 8(d) and 8(j) are generally worded and are greatly misused due to their wide parameters. Thus they need critical scrutinization.
Adding on to the open ended nature and vagueness of the Act we have- Lack of awareness among the citizens related to which Public Authority has the required information is the key problem with the Act. The government's move to exempt CBI from the Right to Information Act has met with widespread criticism from activists who have described it as a "retrograde" step. Dilution of the act has been deliberately done. Most of the Information Commissioners are ex IAS, while the Act clearly states that information commissioners may be selected from diverse backgrounds like technology, law, journalism etc. Thus the procedure for appointment should be studied. There is a need for capacity enhancement in Public Authorities for handling RTI queries. Ten information commissioners are too less for a country with 2 billion population.
Garima Singh, Ist year, B.A. LLB (Hons.) National Law School of India University, Bangalore.
The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 was passed by the government of India with a view to bring more transparency and accountability in governance. As the name suggests, this act treats information as a right of every citizen of India. The act is meant to be a tool for the people of India to get more involved and aware in the process of governance. There however have been many problems in implementing this Act in letter and spirit.
Awareness: Although Section 26 of the act states “the appropriate Government may develop and organize programmes to advance public understanding of the Act”. However various surveys done by the media and other organizations indicate that awareness about the RTI act is very low among the citizens, In my own knowledge there are public offices where Public Information Officer is not nominated till now. Also, the major sources of creating awareness about the RTI Act were just word of mouth. The awareness levels amongst the disadvantaged sections like women, rural population and SC/ST/OBC was particularly low.
Use of Information Technology: As per Section 6(1) of the Act a citizen can make a request “in writing or through electronic means in English or Hindi or in the official language of the area in which the application is being made” However, inadequate efforts have been made to receive RTI applications through electronic means i.e., on email/ website etc, very few Official websites have an external link to file E-RTI, which could be easily done by the appropriate Government using Section 26(3c).
Abhijeet Singh, 3rd Year (Final Year), Vth Semester, Law School, Banaras Hindu University, Uttar Pradesh.
Section 4 of the act says that government authorities should voluntarily disclose information. But the section is vague as to who will be responsible for disclosure of the information. Also there is no clarity regarding liability in case there is no information disclosed.
Another issue is the vagueness as to what all authorities come under the purview of the RTI act. What kinds of authorities would come under the act is still unclear. Also, private entities do not come under the ambit of the act directly.
Lack of proper awareness is another thing impeding proper execution of the act. The general public does not know the extent and use of the act. This is more prominent in rural areas.
An important lacuna to the RTI act was ‘the lack of mandatory monitoring mechanism to look at the implementation of the RTI Act and to ensure that the Act is implemented in letter and spirit.’
Poor infrastructure is another lacuna as per a study conducted by Right to Information Assessment and Analysis Group (RAAG). 900 P.I.O’s were interviewed out of which 60% claimed no previous training. Another problem is that of poor record maintenance. No effort has been made to collect, analyze and store information in a manner that is available and useful to the public. This leads to delays in the provision of information and is more often than not used as an excuse not to provide the information requested.
The act even finds a way to make sure that the Central Government, State Governments and the Competent Authorities as defined in S.2 (e) are vested with powers to make rules to carry out the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005. (S.27 & S.28).
Atul V Mohan, 2nd year of 5 year course (UG), National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS),Cochin
An important aspect is also that ultimately, who uses the Act? It is widely proven that only the elite, educated masses and people who are educated and know how to play with the lacunae use it. For example, the Corporate Organizations, who take information and use it against their competitors.
Another important aspect is that amidst the transfer of information to anyone who asks it, the government risks its own officials against private feuds or conspiracies. It is well noted even in the newspapers that individual bureaucrats are targeted under the umbrella of Right to Information. This information is used to resolve personal biases, and hence, is not in the interest of ‘General public’, as per the central theme of the Act. And with so many undaunted officials, who take risk of their lives to disclose underhand activities that go on in various departments, there are no security measures to protect those officials, who go out of way to perform their job.
Lokesh Sharma, 3rd Semester, LL.B. (Hons.), Faculty of Law, BHU, Varanasi.
A lacuna is an empty space in the law with no regulations applicable or an absent part in a law or another written document such as a contract.
The important changes proposed to be incorporated ,inter alia ,includes establishment of an appellate machinery with investigating powers to review decisions of the public information officer; penal provisions for failure to provide information as per law; provisions to ensure maximum disclosure and minimum exemptions, consist with the constitutional provisions, and effective mechanism for access to information and disclosure by authorities , etc. in view of significant changes proposed in the existing act,
Sowmya Joshi, 3rd Year B.A, L.L.B, College: Bangalore Institute of Legal Studies (BILS)
Under the Act a right to information is given only to the citizen of India. Where as in most countries such a restriction is not made. For instance the Freedom of Information Act 2000, passed by the United Kingdom, provides this right to any person, except ‘alien enemies’ on the valid assumption that there is nothing to prevent citizens from sharing information from non-citizens. Thus in India too, it is suggested that the right to information should be extended to non-citizens also.
Halsbury defines Public Authority as “a person or administrative body with functions to perform for the benefit of the public and not for private profit”. This is a much wider and appropriate definition as far as the Right to Information Act is concerned, as this would include each and every organization that affects the public at large and it needs to be adopted.
In the complex globalized world of today, large and often trans-national corporate houses make and implement decisions that have far reaching implications on the life and livelihoods, health and future of the citizens. However they are not accountable to the citizens for these decisions and their decisions are generally not transparent. At the same time the burgeoning NGO sector, which is fast developing and influencing public life must also be answerable to the public. The Act specifically excludes the information from private authorities. In the era of privatization, wherein the private enterprises are playing a major role in public life, not providing for access to private information about decision-making, scheming and operations remains a deficiency. In the private corporate hospitals, the patients who pay heavy fee for treatment should be entitled to record of the health and treatment as of right. This Act should have ensured such a right.
Abhishek Kumar, Final year {Semester IX}BA. LLB, New Law College, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University, Pune – 411038
The effort to limit the tenure of the Information Commissioners to not more than 5 years seems retrograde. It only lends more voice to the growing criticism that there is no continuity in the Information Commission. New appointees do not have much idea about ongoing tasks and barely get time to settle down. It is necessary to ensure that the post is not monopolized by a group of individuals and the effort to limit the tenure to certain years is a step in the right direction. However, the limit of 5 years is not ideal. The limit should be increased to 10 years or two terms instead of 5 years.
Inadequate efforts have been made to receive RTI applications through electronic means i.e., on email/ website etc, which can be done by the appropriate Government using Section 26(3c).
Every government organization and department is supposed to have an external link on its website for RTI related queries. However, there are many departments and organizations which haven’t provided any links for RTI queries. The Government of India’s, Ministry of Environment and Forests is perhaps one of the few departments which has updates its website regularly and has an external link for RTI applications pertaining to the ministry.
Sarthak Garg, B.A., L.L.B (Hons.), Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Patiala - 147 001 (Punjab)
The RTI got enforced in India within few months which proved to be insufficient to change the mindset of the people in the Government. The information seeker and constraints faced by the information seeker while making an information request are vivid. Then this request is followed by various surveys and observations at the grass root level which takes much of a time and it is faced with constraints of various civil societies. The basic problem over here is lack of public awareness.
Another issue observed in the surveys that the payment mechanisms prescribed in some of the states are inconvenient to the citizens applying from locations outside the concerned state. The payment mechanism involved is all jinxed up when it comes to inter-state transactions.
Obsolete record management guidelines are also one of the gaps in the RTI. Ineffective record management system and collection of information from field offices leading to delay in processing of RTI applications.
There is also a gap in reviewing and reporting mechanism. One of the most important roles of Information commission is to monitor and review the Public Authority and initiate actions to make them comply with the implementation of the act. Monitoring and reviewing are also one of the important aspects which could help to reduce the number of appeals.
Kumar Sumit, Bangalore Institute of Legal Studies, Bangalore
One of the most commonly heard criticisms is that the act only covers government organisations and does not take into account the private organisations. It is believed that it’s high time that all sections of the society are made accountable, whether public or private. Hence, this right should be extended to the private entities also. This was one criticism which was targeted at the framework of the act itself. But there are many other issues which have been raised relating to the various provisions of the act.
One major drawback observed in the act was that section 5 which designates the public authorities to appoint a Public Information Officer (PIO) does not lay down any criteria for the same. Due to this omission, it has been observed in various public authorities that people working in clerical cadre have been appointed as Public Information Officers and they are not able to carry out their jobs effectively as they lack the required authority. Hence, it is required that certain minimum criteria should be there for appointing Public information officers to avoid such problems.
Recent controversy regarding the act has been caused due to the ruling of the Supreme Court on appointment of Central and State Information Commissions. The court ruled that all commissions would work in the benches of two, one of whom would be a judicial member, i.e. a person having a degree in law. These judicial members have to be appointed in consultation with the Chief Justice of India as well as the respective state. Further, the Chief Information Commissioner at the centre must be a person who is or has been the Chief Justice of a High Court or judge of the Supreme Court.
These guidelines have created a lot of confusion. Presently, the Chief Information Commissioner is a retired bureaucrat but according to these guidelines, he’s not eligible for the post. Further, this requirement of judicial members would lead to delays in the process as it would increase the procedural formalities and make the process more complicated. Also, another drawback noticed was that a Supreme Court judge retires at the age of 65 and the same goes for the Chief Information Commissioner. This makes it impossible for a retired Supreme Court judge to be appointed as Chief Information Commissioner.
Lavanya Chawla, I st year, B.A L.L.B(Hons.), National Law School of India University, Bangalore.