1
Summary
Governance Class 05

INTRODUCTION (01:01 PM)

  • A Brief Review Of the Previous Class.

WEAKNESSES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT (01:05 PM)

  • Official Secret Act (OSA): OSA 1943 was passed by the colonial administration to hide its exploitative nature from the native Indians.
  • Apart from OSA, the Indian Evidence Act 1872 was also passed to make sure that the entire information is kept highly secretive.
  • As pointed out by the 2nd ARC, these legislations have only promoted a culture of secrecy within the administration. a
  • It is a well-known fact that wherever there is secrecy, there is always scope for misuse and abuse of power and corruption.
  • The objectives of RTI are to promote transparency in administration whereas OSA promotes secrecy.
  • 2nd ARC recommended that OSA should be removed as both of them can not sit together i.e. where there is RTI, there can not be any scope for OSA.
  • It should be replaced with the NSA where all critical information related to national security should be part of the NSA and the rest of the information should be made public under RTI.
  • The government has rejected this recommendation as a very small percentage of total information falls under OSA(3%) whereas the rest of the information is available under RTI.
  •  India's RTI is mostly inspired by the Freedom of Information Act of the USA.
  • In the USA even top-secret information is made public after 30 years whereas under OSA once information is categorised as top-secret information, it will never be made public.
  • 2nd ARC recommended that even top secret information should also be made public after 30 years so that the objectives of RTI are achieved.
  • The status is that this recommendation has not been implemented by the government.

PROBLEMS WITH INFORMATION COMMISSIONS (01:34 PM)

  • At present there are more than 3 lakh cases are pending with central and state information commissions.
  • It is believed that RTI is becoming ineffective due to the huge pendency of cases.
  • The Credibility of Information commissions has also become a major issue.
  • Both central and state governments have appointed mostly retired bureaucrats as the members of information commissions.
  • They have spent all their life only hiding information from the public by strictly enforcing OSA.
  • Certainly, as members of Information commissions they are expected to aggressively promote transparency in governance.
  • It led to a serious credibility crisis in the functioning of information commissions as pointed out by the 2nd ARC commission.
  • The Information Commission has the power to direct ministries and departments to disclose information sought by applicants.
  • If they fail to do so within the stipulated period within stipulated period, they also have the power to impose fines.
  • It has been observed that in more than 85% of cases, the ministry and departments have not paid the fines.
  • The Information Commission does not have any power to oversee the implementation of their judgements.
  • It has also been observed that both at the central and state level, governments have not appointed members to the information commissions.
  • It has adversely impacted the functioning of the Information Commissions.

SOLUTIONS (01:44 PM)

  • Sec 11 and 12 of the RTI Act, should be amended.
  • They deal with the appointment of members to Information Commissions.
  • 2nd ARC recommended the following:
  • Half the members of the Information commissions should be from non-civil services backgrounds.
  • At least half the members should be from Civil Society Organisations and NGOs, who have been working in the field of RTI in the recent past.
  • It can make these information commissions more credible.
  • Information commissions should also be given the necessary financial assistance to increase their staff strength.
  • It can help timely disposal of cases.
  • It should be made mandatory for both central and state governments to appoint full members to the Information Commission.
  • It should not lead to the discretion of governments.
  • The Information Commission should also be given the power of contempt of Court because their judgements are not implemented by the ministries and departments in a deliberate manner 

RESPONSE OF GOVT. OF INDIA (01:52 PM)

  • In 2019, GOI has made changes to the RTI Act.
  • It is alleged by critics that these changes have made RTI completely ineffective.
  • Changes wrt to the original legislation of 2005:
  • The Information Commission was given the status of a constitutional body like an election commission even though it was only a statutory organisation.
  • 2019: The government has removed this status saying that a statutory body can not be given the status of a constitutional body.
  • 2005: CIC was given the same status as that of the CEC and the rest of the Information Commissioners were given the status of  Election Commissioners.
  • 2019: Members of the Information Commission were downgraded to only the rank of secretary with GOI.
  • 2005: In the original RTI Act, Information Commission members were also given the same security of tenure enjoyed by the EC.
  • 2019: The GOI has removed the security of tenure given to Information Commission members and they can be removed at any point in time before the expiry of their term.
  • Their tenure was also reduced from 5 years to 3 years.
  • Salaries and allowances for IC members were the same as that of election commission members till the 90s.
  • Salaries and allowances of IC members were delinked from EC.
  • They will be independently determined by the government.
  • 2019 legislation has also given power to the central govt. to appoint members to state Information commissions.
  • Arguments by GOI:
  • GOVt has argued that IC is only a statutory body and it can not be given the same status as EC which is a constitutional body.
  • By delinking their salaries from EC members, it allows the GOI to pay more salaries to Information Commission(IC) members.
  • The GOI has also argued that even though it has reduced the tenure of IC members from 5 to 3 years, they can be renominated to their positions after their tenure is over.
  • Arguments of Critics:
  • Critics have argued that by making these changes, The GOI has made RTI totally ineffective.
  • These changes have effectively taken away the functional and financial autonomy of ICs.
  • At present Information Commission (IC) has become nothing but an extension of govt. departments.
  • Conclusion:
  • It must be remembered that the effective functioning of democracy depends on transparency and accountability in the functioning of political and administrative systems.
  • RTI is a landmark legislation which should be strengthened by empowering Information Commissions.

MISUSE OF RTI (02:18 PM)

  • This is the second major problem wrt to RTI.
  • It has been observed by the 2nd ARC and also by various committees that RTI has been misused by vested interest.
  • Organisations are using information received through RTI to blackmail officials and also defame their political opponents.
  • 2nd ARC has recommended the following to prevent the misuse of RTI:
  • It has been recommended to make changes to sec 7 of RTI,
  • PIO after receiving the RTI application can reject this application in consultation with the member of the Information Commission if it is believed that no public interest is served by providing this information.
  • These changes can help in :
  • 1) Preventing the misuse of RTI.
  • 2) They will also reduce the burden on IC.
  • But these recommendations have been criticised by the RTI activist.
  • It is believed that these changes will only promote, more secrecy in the functioning of the government.
  • If there is any misuse of RTI, the solution should focus on preventing the misuse rather than reducing the scope of RTI.

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE (02:36 PM)

  • Rather than making changes to Sec 7 of RTI, it is suggested that changes should be made to Sec 4 of RTI.
  • It should be made mandatory for all govt departments and ministries to update all the information available to them on the website on real real-time basis.
  • If the information is available to everyone, there is little scope for its misuse.
  • The next issue with the RTI is the Deliberate destruction of Information (03:4 PM)
  • It has been observed that most governments have deliberately destroyed information to avoid accountability.
  • The information is either deliberately misplaced or destroyed.
  • 2nd ARC has suggested the following:
  • MIS (Management Information Systems) can be used to digitalise information and also to store information scientifically.
  • It is also suggested that this information should be immediately put on the websites of ministries and departments on a real-time basis so that it can not destroyed by implementing Sec 4 of RTI.
  • The next problem is that RTI has been opposed by many organisations including Army, judiciary NGOs and Public-private partnerships.
  • 2nd ARC recommended that all these institutions should be brought under the scope of RTI so that transparency can be achieved within the administration.
  • The next problem with RTI is the Colonial attitude with bureaucracy.
  • It can be seen that most of the structural reforms in India have been a failure because of the colonial attitudes of our bureaucracy.
  • For example. 73rd and 74th Amendments.
  • Similarly RTI has not achieved the desired outcomes because of the colonial attitude.
  • Our civil servants still believe that they are the masters and should treat people as their servants
  • This attitude has failed to recognise the significance of this landmark legislation in empowering citizens.

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE (03:25 PM)

  • Sensitivity training should be imparted to transform colonial attitudes into democratic values.
  • The next problem is the lack of awareness among stakeholders: It has been observed that a maximum number of RTI applications have been filed mostly from Urban areas and middle-class education sections of society.
  • The number of RTI applications from rural areas is very less indicating a lack of awareness among stakeholders.
  • What should be done: CSO, NGOs, Media and the Govt. must create awareness among people, especially in rural areas about the benefits of RTI.
  • Filing of RTI applications should also be made easy.
  • Citizens should be allowed to file RTI applications online and also pay the fees online.
  • It makes the entire process easier simpler and impartial.
  • The next problem is the protection of RTI activists:
  • Since 2005 many RTI activists have been killed for making corruption within the administration public.
  • Changes made to the Whistle-Blowers Protection Act have also weakened RTI.
  • Vested interests in society have strongly resisted RTI by creating fear in the minds of RTI activists by killing them.
  • What should be done:
  • Personal details of RTI activists should be kept secretive.
  • The can be kept encrypted so that secrecy can be maintained.
  • Changes also should be made to the Protection Of Whistle Blowers Act so that their safety and security can be ensured.
  • Digital Personal Data protection BIll:
  • According to RTI activists Digital Personal Data Protection Bill passed by parliament has severely restricted the scope of RTI.
  • It has amended sec 8 (1) j of the RTI Act and it seeks to exempt all personal information.
  • Previously to deny personal information at least one of the following grounds must be provided:
  • 1) Information sought has no relationship to any public activity.
  • 2) It has no relationship to any public interest.
  • 3) It would cause an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
  • 4) PIO are appellate authority is satisfied that there is no larger public interest in providing the information.

(TOPIC FOR THE NEXT CLASS: CSO AND NGOS)