The RTI Act is still safe from dilution, as the cabinetwithdrew a set of amendments it had proposed to the Act. UPA chairperson andNational Advisory Council chief Sonia Gandhi’s strong opposition to theamendments is said to be a major factor behind the withdrawal.
The amendments proposed and passed by the cabinet in 2006but hanging fire since, sought to restrict disclosure of “file notings” only tosocial and development issues in response to queries under RTI Act. It was seenas an effort to dilute the transparency law.
While the Act already exempts ongoing cabinet decisions fromthe purview of RTI, the amendments also barred queries on executive decisionstill the process is completed. Also, amendment proposed exemption to disclosureof examination papers and selection to the Union Public Service Commission.
The amendments were never brought to Parliament due topublic protest. Minister of state for personnel V Narayanasamy has acceptedthat the decision was taken in response to representations by civil societyactivists, NGOs and information commissioners.
The cabinet’s decision has come as a relief to the RTIfraternity, which was worried after Prime Minister Singh cautioned that the RTIAct cannot be used to violate privacy of an individual, and a recent judgmentof the Supreme Court mandating the appointment of judges to the informationcommission.
While the RTI fraternity welcomed the government’s decisionto junk the proposed amendments, some eyebrows are being raised over what willcome next.
Nikhil Dey, member, National Campaign for People’s Right toInformation, called it a “welcome step” and an “important victory”, specifyingthat this proves even a determined government has to eventually give in topublic pressure.
“Ninety percent of RTI Act would have died had disclosure offile notings been restricted, as file notes are at the heart of the Act,” Deysaid. “Similarly, (information on) examination papers and selection process isone big area where lack of transparency pervades, and that would have beenwashed away as well.
“The amendments also barred queries on executive decisionstill the process is completed. That, too, would have restricted the Act,” headded.
But Dey said if the UPA is really serious about governance,it should pass the Lokpal Bill.
All eyes on future
Former information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi, however, isnot willing to call the decision a major development, stressing that PrimeMinister Manmohan Singh had already assured earlier that the UPA will not pushfor the amendments.
But anxious over the next development, Gandhi said, “Theprime minister spoke about several issues at the RTI convention, and theSupreme Court gave four rulings over the last one year, which happened torestrict the Act. So what really has now prompted the government to announcethis (decision to junk the proposed amendments)? My worry is what will follownext ” the ideal situation would be for the government to issue a statementthat the Act will not be amended at all.”
Vikram Sinha, an RTI user who also runs an RTI study centrein Bangalore, meanwhile dubbed it a move to please the activists. “Why is itbeing publicised and given so much importance?” he asked. Calling the decisiona political gambit, he said, “The government now wants to show that RTI was theUPA’s brainchild, and all efforts are being made to save it from gettingdiluting.”
Calling withdrawal of the amendments a good step amidcontrarian statements coming from the PM, among others, Pradip Pradhan, stateconvener of Odisha Soochna Adhikar Abhijan said, “The (proposed) amendmentswere arbitrary in nature. Every citizen has the right to know what ishappening, and that involves the right to access files notings as well. Butsome judgments of the apex court and statements by the prime minister areactually diluting the Act. This at least is a step to save it.”
