An appeal to save the Right to Information or RTI Act 2005

The Right to Information Act 2005 was considered to be one of the greatest acts of Indian Parliament.

Termed as a pro-people Act, the legislation was aimed at making the bureaucracy more transparent and accountable.

It helped the average citizen get things done without paying bribes.

But now the government plans to cripple the act by making fundamental changes to the Act that makes it virtually useless.

The latest amendment to disallow disclosure of file notings will take the sheen away from this otherwise people-friendly legislation.

Amendment to take life out of RTI Act: CIC Press Trust of India New Delhi, July 20, 2006

OP Kejriwal, member, Central Information Commissioner on Thursday night said the Union Cabinet's decision to exclude officials' notings on government files from the purview of the Right to Information Act will take "life out of the law".

"Information minus the file notings amount to taking the life out of the RTI Act," Kejriwal said in an interview to a private news channel.

"There were hundreds, literally hundreds, who got their ration cards, electricity connections only by filing an application where they asked what was the daily progress of the applications and who were the officers dealing with their applications.

"Now if the file notings are closed, the entire process is stalled," he said.

Kejriwal said, "Once you try to save the names of officials, you try to hide the way the file has moved. What remains in the Act?"

The basic objective of the Act, he pointed out, is to prevent and put a stop to corruption.

"We earnestly hope that the government sees to it that the Act remains its basic strength," he said.

Government gives in to babus, takes life out of RTI law Aloke Tikku, New Delhi, July 21, 2006

The Cabinet on Thursday gave its nod to an amendment to restrict access to file notings under the Right to Information law, a move that RTI activists say has the potential to practically kill the infant law.

"It'll take the entire life out of the law; it's unfortunate," said OP Kejriwal, member, Central Information Commission (CIC).

Corruption can only be detected in file notings -- records of the government's decision-making process. Without them, it will never be revealed who took the decision and on what grounds.

Earlier, the bureaucracy had interpreted the existing provisions to have barred access to file notings. The CIC had, however, rejected this view.

Restricting access to file notings implies that under the RTI law citizens can at best seek what decisions were taken -- almost never why.

This is why Aruna Roy -- among the ones who started the 'right to information' campaign a decade ago -- says the government has bowed to pressure from the bureaucracy and the people in power.

She said if the amendment was carried through Parliament, "It'll give protection to corruption and the arbitrary use of power. Both these things can be understood in total only if you look at the way decisions are being made."

The government had sought to take away half of what it gave a year ago, she said, pledging to "fight every inch" to prevent the cabinet decision from getting parliamentary approval.

Activists protest govt move to tame RTI Friday, July 21, 2006 (New Delhi)

The UPA government has decided to introduce crucial amendments to the RTI act, which critics say will weaken the impact of the Act.

The Union Cabinet on Thursday approved an amendment to the RTI Act, wherein it decided to exempt file notings of officials from the Act.

RTI activists had been protesting the exclusion of file notings, as these were critical in forming policy and taking decisions, which affect the lives of people.

In response to the decision, activist Aruna Roy, the woman who set off the Right to Information movement, has said that it is simply not acceptable and that the campaigners doubt the intent of the government.

She added that she would carry the fight forward to implement the Act in the right sense with the support of common man.

"We got the Act, and we will make sure that the government implements this," she said, while adding that the amendments effectively destroy the Act.

Weakening the law

Speaking to NDTV, the chief information commissioner has agreed that even in their deliberations they had concluded that file notings should not be exempt.

"It is not our job to decide whether a law is good or not, our job is to implement the law. It is the job of the parliament to decide the merits of the law. Yes, in our deliberations, we had come to the conclusion that file notings should not be exempt," said Wajahat Habibullah, Chief Information Commissioner.

If Parliament passes the amendments, then file notings or comments by government officers on the files will not be revealed and only notings on social projects will be made public.

The amendments may also reduce the power of the law to hold several government departments accountable, thereby weakening the law.

The amendments will affect people in their daily life in terms of issues regarding their passports, appointments in UPSC jobs and getting cabinet papers, promotions and government contracts.

Unclear motives

Moreover, the amendments have also upset the Central Information Commission.

"Removing file notings will take the life out of the law. I hope that the government steps in or Sonia Gandhi steps in to stop such a move," said OP Kejriwal, Central Information Commissioner.

The RTI has helped many Indians get their due, and thus, it is difficult to understand why the government would want to dilute this law. Perhaps, the reason is that the law worked too well.

Anna Hazare threatens to return Padma Bhushan Ahmednagar (Maharashtra), July 22

Social activist Anna Hazare on Saturday criticised the government's decision to amend the RTI Act, saying he was "upset and disappointed" by the move.

"The Central government will damage the soul of the right to information act if the proposal to change it gets the sanction," the anti-corruption crusader said.

The decision to amend the RTI Act was taken following the objections raised by some government organisations.

The organisations had opined that decisions taken could be conveyed, but not in terms of the details as to how the decisions were arrived at.

"Decisions can be conveyed, not in terms of details about what the Under Secretary or Joint Secretary wrote or what the Secretary disapproved".

Amendment to RTI Act approved Notings not to be disclosed Tribune News Service, New Delhi, July 20

The Union Cabinet today approved an amendment, which aims at weakening the Right to Information Act, by debarring the notings of bureaucrats from the citizen's domain.

Also to be put beyond the reach of information-seekers are Cabinet notes, on which the government deliberates for policy decisions. The move comes days after the CIC ruled that a Cabinet note was not a confidential document once a decision on it had been taken.

The Wajahat Habibullah-led CIC gave a big blow to the officials of the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) when it ruled that "file notings", contrary to government's claims, were not exempted under the RTI Act, 2005.

Aruna Roy, the prime mover of the right to information campaign, says the government's decision is a setback.

RTI law mutilated: ARVIND KEJRIWAL

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1797582.cms

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-1797582,curpg-2.cms

Let's put aside for now the fact that 'certain' file notings have been kept out of the purview of Right to Information Act, 2005. A look at the orders passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC) would make one believe that the RTI law was amended, rather mutilated, quite sometime back.

A few examples serve to provide a disturbing insight into the workings of our new information law.

In a bizarre judgment, CIC ruled that one could not ask for information, which can be replied in the form of a yes or no.

In another case, the commission ruled that you cannot ask any questions which started with why, when, whether. One does not find such provisions in the RTI Act.

In one case, CIC said that the expected benefits from disclosure of information should invariably outweigh the costs of providing it. This is not written anywhere in the Act. Besides, on what machinery or expertise does CIC have to do a cost-benefit analysis?

These judgments are in violation of the RTI Act. Those who have attended hearings at the CIC would vouch that while hearing any case, it desperately hunts for a clause under which it can deny information.

Conclusion: Therefore, we the undersigned appeal to everyone concerned not to amend the RTI Act 2005, as it'll weaken the law.