Skip to main content

Seven ex-information commissioners oppose RTI amendment, say govt 'not honest'

By Our Representative
Seven former Information Commissioners of the Central Information Commission (CIC) have condemned the move of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government to amend the Right to Information (RTI) Act, terming it a direct attack on autonomy of information commissions and peoples’ fundamental right to know, urging the government to withdraw the "regressive" amendments.
The RTI Amendment Bill 2019 was passed by Lok Sabha on July 22, 2019 and is now listed for passage in the Rajya Sabha. Pointing out that if passed, the Bill would fundamentally dilute peoples’ right to know, Wajahat Habibullah, Deepak Sandhu (both former chief information commissioners), Shailesh Gandhi, Prof Sridhar Acharyulu, MM Ansari, Yashovardhan Azad and Annapurna Dixit (former information commissioners) addressed media amidst protests across the country against the amendments.
Shailesh Gandhi said that the government has given no plausible reason for bringing amendments to the RTI Act. He countered the claim of the government that the RTI Act was drafted hurriedly and therefore, there were anomalies in it.
He added, the RTI Act before being passed in 2005 was referred to a Standing Committee, which examined all the provisions at length and recommended that, in order to ensure autonomy of information commissions, the commissioners should be given a status equivalent to election commissioners (which in turn are equivalent to Supreme Court judges).
Pointing out that several MPs of BJP were members of the Standing Committee and the current President of India, Ram Nath Kovind, was its member, he rejected the other justification put forth by the government that, because decisions of information commissioners are challenged in high courts, therefore their status being equivalent to Supreme Court judges was causing legal hindrances.
He said, decisions of all authorities, including those of the President and the Prime Minister, are challenged before high courts and that their status does not prevent or debar such challenges, underling, the government is not being honest about why it is bringing these amendments.
Deepak Sandhu said, the RTI Act came through a social movement and it is great to see that the movement is still alive to protect the Act. She underlined the failure of the government to hold any pre-legislative consultation on the RTI Amendment Bill. The commissioners said that the bill should be referred to a Select Committee to enable public consultation.
She highlighted that peoples’ right to information emanates from the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression, and information commissions, being the final adjudicatory body under the Act, are tasked with protecting a fundamental right and, therefore, their autonomy and independence must be protected.
Yashovardhan Azad said, the RTI Act has been functioning for the last 14 years without any problem regarding the tenure and status of information commissioners. He added, the Amendment Bill was a clear attempt by the government to control the tenure and salary of information commissioners and the government seeking these powers would most probably lead to a downgrade.
According to him, if the amendments pass and the government has powers to fix salary and tenure of commissioners through rules, a situation could arise where different commissioners will have different tenures and salaries. He underlined that most of the lakhs of RTI applications filed every year are filed by the common citizens and marginalised sections of society in a bid to secure their rights and entitlements from the government.
Azad said, in most cases decided by the commission, the respondent is the government and, therefore, in order to ensure that commissions can function independently, their autonomy must be protected. Instead of strengthening the RTI Act by proper implementation of proactive disclosure, greater transparency in appointment of commissioners, the government was amending the law, he added, urging the Prime Minister for suggestions of people on the RTI Amendment Bill.
MM Ansari highlighted how there are questions over attempts to undermine independent bodies like the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Election Commission, saying, now it is the turn of information commissions. He said the genesis of the RTI comes from Supreme Court rulings on how right to information is a precondition for informed voting and, therefore, parity between information and election commissioners is not an anomaly.
Questioning claims of the government’s commitment to the RTI Act and transparency, he underlined, an assessment was undertaken on compliance with provisions of proactive disclosures by public authorities. Only one-third of the public authorities responded to the survey sent to them and the analysis showed dismal implementation of Section 4 of the Act.
Further, Ansari noted, the government has discontinued the 'Janane ka Haq' show which used to be a weekly broadcast on the RTI Act on Doordarshan News. Failure to appoint information commissioners in a timely manner was leading to pendency increasing, and if there is downgradation in salary and tenure of commissioners, eminent people may not apply for vacant posts, he added.
Annapurna Dixit said, the attempted dilution could only be described as discrimination against the RTI Act. She added, other bodies like the Chief Vigilance Commission (CVC), which are also statutory but their salaries and status are at par with Constitutional bodies like the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).
According to her, even though CVC is not the final appellate body for a fundamental right and only has recommendatory powers, unlike the information commissions. She questioned the need for the amendment and said that the government should withdraw the bill.
Sridhar Acharyulu said that the RTI Amendment Bill was not just an attack on the RTI Act but also on the Constitutional right to freedom of speech as the RTI emanates from there. He highlighted that the Supreme Court has repeatedly said that the right to information is a fundamental right and that is what empowered the central government to even legislate the RTI Act which was even applicable to states.
Terming the reasons given by the government for the amendment bill as “illogical logic”, he said commissions could survive only because their tenure and salary were protected by law. He further highlighted that in the amendments the government was not specifying what status commissioners would be given.
Underlining the importance of a high status, he said, that was crucial to enable commissioners to give directions to even the cabinet secretary or principal secretary, adding, as the amendments will empower the Central government to fix salaries of even state information commissioners, there were serious questions of federalism, as salaries of state commissioners come from the funds of the state, wondering if states would allow the Centre to decide allocation.
Wajahat Habibullah said that there was no reason for this amendment -- salary and tenure has not been a point of problem or contention. He said though the minister gave an eloquent reply in Parliament during the passage of the Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha, he was weak on facts.
He said if at all any amendment was to be brought, it should be to make the information commission a constitutional body. He added, the government deciding salaries and tenures would beholden commissioners to the government and create apprehensions in their minds.
Anjali Bhardwaj, co-convenor of the National Campaign for Peoples’ Right to Information (NCPRI), which organised the media interaction, said that there have been consistent efforts to undermine the institution of information commissions. Since 2014, the government has not appointed a single commissioners, unless the courts intervened.
RTI activist Lokesh Batra referred to the recent Supreme Court judgment in February 2019 regarding timely and transparent appointment of information commissioners and said, despite that the government had till date has not filled up four vacant posts in the CIC.

Comments

TRENDING

Girl child education: 20 major states 'score' better than Gujarat, says GoI report

By Rajiv Shah
A Government of India report, released last month, has suggested that “model” Gujarat has failed to make any progress vis-à-vis other states in ensuring that girls continue to remain enrolled after they leave primary schools. The report finds that, in the age group 14-17, Gujarat’s 71% girls are enrolled at the secondary and higher secondary level, which is worse than 20 out of 22 major states for which data have been made available.

Savarkar in Ahmedabad "declared support" to two-nation theory in 1937, followed by Jinnah three years later

By Our Representative
One of the top freedom fighters whom BJP and Prime Minister Narendra Modi revere the most, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, was also a great supporter of the two nation theory for India, one for Hindus another for Muslims, claims a new expose on the man who is also known to be the original proponent of the concept of Hindutva.

Congress 'promises' cancellation of Adani power project: Jharkhand elections

Counterview Desk
Pointing out that people's issues take a backseat in Jharkhand's 2019 assembly elections, the state's civil rights organization, the Jharkhand Janadhikar Mahasabha, a coalition of activists and people’s organisations, has said that political parties have largely ignored in their electoral manifestos the need to implement the fifth schedule of the Constitution in a predominantly tribal district.

Hindutva founders 'borrowed' Nazi, fascist idea of one flag, one leader, one ideology

By Shamsul Islam*
With the unleashing of the reign of terror by the RSS/BJP rulers against working-class, peasant organizations, women organizations, student movements, intellectuals, writers, poets and progressive social/political activists, India also witnessed a series of resistance programmes organized by the pro-people cultural organizations in different parts of the country. My address in some of these programmes is reproduced here... 
***  Before sharing my views on the tasks of artists-writers-intellectuals in the times of fascism, let me briefly define fascism and how it is different from totalitarianism. Totalitarianism is political concept, a dictatorship of an individual, family or group which prohibits opposition in any form, and exercises an extremely high degree of control over public and private life. It is also described as authoritarianism.
Whereas fascism, while retaining all these repressive characteristics, also believes in god-ordained superiority of race, cultur…

Ex-World Bank chief economist doubts spurt in India's ease of doing business rank

By Rajiv Shah
This is in continuation of my previous blog where I had quoted from a commentary which top economist Prof Kaushik Basu had written in the New York Times (NYT) a little less than a month ago, on November 6, to be exact. He recalled this article through a tweet on November 29, soon after it was made known that India's growth rate had slumped (officially!) to 4.5%.

Post-Balakot, danger that events might spiral out of control is 'greater, not less'

By Tapan Bose*
The fear of war in South Asia is increasing. Tensions are escalating between India and Pakistan after the Indian defence minister's announcement in August this year that India may revoke its current commitment to only use nuclear weapons in retaliation for a nuclear attack, known as ‘no first use’. According to some experts who are watching the situation the risk of a conflict between the two countries has never been greater since they both tested nuclear weapons in 1998.

With RSS around, does India need foreign enemy to undo its democratic-secular fabric?

By Shamsul Islam*
Many well-meaning liberal and secular political analysts are highly perturbed by sectarian policy decisions of RSS/BJP rulers led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, especially after starting his second inning. They are vocal in red-flagging lynching incidents, policies of the Modi government on Kashmir, the National Register of Citizens (NRC), the demand for 'Bharat Ratna' to Savarkar who submitted 6-7 mercy petitions to the British masters (getting remission of 40 years out of 50 years' sentence), and the murder of constitutional norms in Goa, Karnataka and now in Maharashtra.

Rushdie, Pamuk, 260 writers tell Modi: Aatish episode casts chill on public discourse

Counterview Desk
As many as 260 writers, journalists, artists, academics and activists across the world, including Salman Rushdie, British Indian novelist, Orhan Pamuk, Turkish novelist and recipient of the 2006 Nobel Prize in literature, and Margaret Atwood, Canadian poet and novelist, have called upon Prime Minister Narendra Modi to review the decision to strip British Indian writer Aatish Taseer of his overseas Indian citizenship.

Worrying signs in BJP: Modi, Shah begin 'cold-shouldering' Gujarat CM, party chief

By RK Misra*
The political developments in neighbouring Maharashtra where a Shiv Sena-NCP-Congress government assumed office has had a trickle down effect in Gujarat with both the ruling BJP and the Congress opposition going into revamp mode.

'Favouring' tribals and ignoring Adivasis? Behind coercion of India's aborigines

By Mohan Guruswamy*
Tribal people account for 8.2% of India’s population. They are spread over all of India’s States and Union Territories. Even so they can be broadly classified into three groupings. The first grouping consists of populations who predate the Indo-Aryan migrations. These are termed by many anthropologists as the Austro-Asiatic-speaking Australoid people.