Chapter 3
Exemptions under the act section 8 [ ten as below] and
Section 9 [ private copyright]
Exemptions for FSL section 8[2][5][7]&[8]
The following is exempt from disclosure [s.8)]
• I. Information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the state, relation with foreign state or lead to incitement of an offence
• Ii. Information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal or the disclosure of which may constitute contempt of court;
• Iii. Information, the disclosure of which would cause a breach of privilege of parliament or the state legislature;
• Iv. Information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information;
• V. Information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information;
• Vi. Information received in confidence from foreign government;
• Vii. Information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of Information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes;
• Viii. Information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders;
• Ix. Cabinet papers including records of deliberations of the council of ministers, secretaries and other officers;
• X. Information which relates to personal Information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual;
Notwithstanding any of the exemptions listed above
• A public authority may allow access to information, if public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests.
Section 9: copyright of private individuals and not held by state.
Twenty years ago…..
However, any Information about events which happened 20 years ago is to be provided, unless the sovereignty of India or contempt of court is at stake.
Severability [s.10]
– If the record contains exempted Information in parts, PIO can give that part of the record which can be reasonably severed.
– Notice has to be given to applicant stating that info is only part, reasons for the decision, details of fees, details of right to review
Third party
If info to be disclosed was supplied in confidence by a third party, then:
• In 5 days, invite submission from 3rd party
• Submission to be in 10 days
• Keep submission in mind
• Allow disclosure only if public interest outweighs harm to 3rd party
• Give notice of decision to 3rd party, stating his entitlement to appeal
Chapter 4
A critique of proposed amendments : Anna Hazare
In fact the RTI 2005 act provides that any Information that is bound to be supplied to the Lok Sabha and Raj Sabha, cannot be denied to the people. That is why the proposed amendments are unjust and incorrect. If these amendments are passed, the council of ministers may take decisions at will and not be answerable to the people. E.g. If a particular agricultural land is sought for industrial use and the council of ministers decide to acquire the land for conversion in spite of resistance by the concerned farmers and adverse file notings by the district authorities, the fact of case will never be known since file notings will not be disclosed.
(2) the government also intends to conceal details of opinion, legal advice and recommendations of experts or group of people who have examined a project/program related to social or development work, outside the preview of section 8.
Such amendment is unfair and unjust since there should be no harm in providing information, if an individual or a group of people who have worked sincerely and have given their professional / legal opinion keeping in mind public interest. If proposed amendment is allowed to be passed, people will have to accept public losses based on dishonest recommendations.
(3), u/s 8 (1) the government also plans to exclude Information about examinations conducted by the public authorities for appointment / promotion of candidates to various posts in the government. Similarly Information will also be denied about admission criteria to be applied for various educational courses.
This amendment too is unjust. It may not be objectionable to deny Information about deciding eligibility of the candidate in various competitive tests conducted by various bodies, but once results are declared there should not be any objection for a candidate to see answer books of candidate, who have scored higher marks.
This will help bring uniformity in marking system in the written examinations and prevent malpractice in allotment of marks to improve the standard of examining answer books. It is also necessary to know the basis of granting promotions because there usually are many complaints of corruption and dishonest means used in this process. It is essential to maintain transparency in such matters.
It is astonishing that the government wishes to keep the admission process to various education institutes out side the purview of Information act. It is known fact that millions of rupees are collected by the educational institutions for granting admission to management, medical and technical faculties. In such situation, keeping the Information outside preview of RTI will encourage corruption. It is therefore necessary to oppose this amendment with full force. If this amendment is permitted, auction system will prevail in the education system in the private educational institutions that will make education a profitable business.
(4) exception in section 8 (1) is also planned to prohibit supply of Information regarding notings, extracts, hand written notes, files and legal opinion until final decision is taken in the matter and the issue is complete and over.
If these amendments are passed, the RTI will loose its soul. Deliberate attempt will then be made to take away all the rights given to people by the original act. It has been experienced that decisions in government offices are invariably delayed and their implementations are also deliberately delayed. Once this amendment is passed, the ministers and bureaucrats will further delay their decision – some times indefinitely
And take shelter under “the matter is under consideration”, for not supplying information. Possibility decision taking process will continue indefinitely. Therefore it is necessary to resist these amendments, in order to protect the act and effectively check corruption.
(5) in order make impression that additional powers are to be granted to the Information commissions, government propose to add two sub-sections in section 18. According to proposed sub section 18 (5), the commissions will be given more powers and responsibilities to make the act more effective. However, actually the proposed sub section 18 (6) takes away most rights of the commission. The original act provides authority to receive application if PIO or AA refuses to accept the same. The ICS
In such cases can take cognizance of the complaints and impose fine where necessary, after enquiring in to the complaint. But due to the proposed amendment the rights of the commissions to take decisions on appeals and complaints will be taken away and mere recommendatory powers will be vested in the ICS. Final decision shall rest with the government making the act tooth less.
(6). Some PIOS have started misusing provision of sec 8 (1)j, to deny Information on pretext that giving Information concerning you also is not in public interest.
Right to Information act is vital for healthy democracy. Similarly the acts like additional powers to gram sabha, delays in official matters and government officer’s transfer laws are also important. If members of public are educated and awareness created about this act, 75 to 80% corruption will go away and people will enjoy true democracy. Youth is
Real power for nation and if every youth participates in national cause, the whole picture of nation will change within no time.
A quiet second attempt to maul Right to Information has been put down. The Central Information commission (CIC) has tossed out the government view that individual Commissioner s had no powers to decide appeals and issue directions to government bodies, saying this interpretation would make the law “meaningless”.
“no such interpretation can ever be accepted which will make the act, which confers the right on a citizen to access information, totally unworkable,” a full bench of the commission headed by wajahat habibullah held, staving off the second attempt by the department of personnel and training (DOPT) to take the sting out of the Right to Information (RTI) act.
The CIC also upheld public access to file notings under the law and rejected the contention that the commission had no powers to tell the department of personnel and training to remove a misleading portion of its website. “no public authority, government or statutory organisation can ever claim that it is above the law,” the commission held in its 25-page decision that asserted the autonomous character of the CIC.
The case had its origins in the railway ministry last year explaining its refusal to allow an applicant access to file notings on the plea that the website of DOPT– the nodal department for RTI – had excluded file notings out of the purview of the law. The commission consequently told DOPT to correct the misleading portion of its website.
The protagonists of more assertive CIC in RTI have the following agenda which was listed in convention on 14th October during the CIC convention presided over by president APJ ABDULKALAM
• The CIC and the SICS should impose penalties as a matter of law and rule rather than as exceptions in order to effectively implement the act and reduce the number of second appeals reaching the commissions.
• The Central and state Information commissions should ensure that by January 2007, not more than 5% of the second appeals and complaints will be pending for disposal for over 60 days.
• An opportunity for hearing must be given to all appellants and complainants.
• Central and state Information commissions should go by the letter of the law and ensure that denial of Information is only as per the exemptions listed in the law.
• The governments must provide the requisite staff and facilities to the commissions.
• The governments must appoint all ten Commissioner s.
• All public authorities, ministries and departments must provide a monthly report to the commission in accordance with section 25 (2) of the act, and action should be taken against officials who do not provide these.
• The commissions must submit their reports latest by November end to the governments so that they can be placed before the legislatures/ parliament.
• All public authorities must fulfill the requirements under section 4 and a compliance report submitted by them to the commissions by November 2006.
• The government must give an assurance of making no changes to the RTI act for the next two years. [resolution prepared by Mr. Shailesh Gandhi And Rakesh Agarwal, Nyaya Bhoomi]
• There should be dedicated ” RTI audit teams (RTIAT)” under Central government and each state government to periodically review the implementation of RTI act by the public authorities in various departments, PSUS, autonomous bodies, etc. RTIAT should report to cabinet secretary in respect of public authorities of the Central government and to the chief secretary of states in respect of public authorities in his jurisdiction. RTIAT should report non-implementation of RTI act to the head of department to enable him / her to work out a practical time bound action plan. The reports of RTIAT should also be sent to CIC /SICS. Annual report of CIC /SICS under section 25 of the RTI act should be based on reports from each ministry / department under section 25(2), as well as the findings of the RTIAT.
• Information commissions should have the support of an RTIAT as an effective review/audit mechanism, to render reports under section 25 of the RTI act. NGOS and citizen groups may be encouraged to conduct independent audit of the implementation of RTI act by the public authorities. Wherever non-implementation is reported to CIC/SICS, he may ask the government to take corrective action and report action thereon in their report under section 25.
• Annual confidential report of all officers of officers at all level may specifically mention his / her contribution in implementing RTI act. [Dhirendra Krishna Ia&As (Retired)]
No comments:
Post a Comment