|
Plus&Minus
"A weekly column: Plus&Minus will
be published in Hindustan Times, Jaipur Live. This will
speak to the ordinary reader on contemporary economic issues in a
simple format".
Right to Information is the Secret to Good Governance
Hindustan Times, Jaipur Live, September 07, 2009
<<Archive>>
By Pradeep S Mehta While
researching a proposed international agreement on investment in 1996,
I asked the Swedish delegate for their government’s submissions in
highly secret negotiations being conducted by the rich nations’ club:
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Paris.
He gladly handed over copies of the Swedish submissions, as the
information culture in Sweden allowed him to share with me such
information, often times treated as highly confidential by most
governments, including India, in the world.
Sweden was the first country
in the world to pass an access to information law in 1776. Since then
there has been a steady increase in public demand at the global level
for legislation that stresses upon transparency, openness and
accountability on the part of the government, thereby ensuring that
official proceedings are not kept secret from the very people for whom
it is made and good governance is promoted. In response to such
justified demands by citizens, by 2006 around 68 nations had responded
by enacting suitable laws.
Such legislation is variously
termed as ‘freedom of information’, ‘right to information’,
‘information access’ legislation or even ‘sunshine laws’ and ‘open
records’. By 2006, almost 37 countries had approved of the legislation
in Europe, 14 countries in the Americas, and 12 in Asia. India adopted
the Right to Information Act (RTI) in 2005.
In India, free flow of
information has always been constrained by factors such as the
Official Secrets Act, 1923 which is a legacy of the Colonial era.
The RTI Act of 2005 was
preceded by the Freedom of Information Act in 2000, which was
especially important since it superseded the Official Secrets Act of
1923. Yet, the law suffered from a number of disadvantages: no
specification of punishment for officials withholding required
information; retention of wide discretionary powers by government
officials to withhold information including file noting as well as
Cabinet papers.
Due to these flaws in the
mentioned Act, it could never be implemented effectively. However, it
did act as a stepping stone to a law with more teeth: the RTI Act of
2005 also superseded the Official Secrets Act. The RTI allows the
public to inspect works, documents, and records; take notes, extracts
or certified copies of documents or records; take certified samples of
material; and obtain information in the form of printouts, diskettes,
floppies, tapes, and video cassettes or in any other electronic mode
or through printouts. The required information has to be submitted by
the relevant public authority within 30 days.
In an improvement over the
previous Act, the RTI lists out penalties for unresponsive behaviour
on the apart of the public authorities. Another important feature of
this Bill is the provision for Information Commissions – independent
high-level bodies at both the Central and State levels, which are
entrusted with the task of facilitating information as appellate
bodies.
Expectedly, there have been
many controversies surrounding the initial stages of the RTI.
 |
