Suggestion for improvement of RTI Act and it's functionality

[abhijeet]

Date of hearing or any postponment etc should be available in respective website of CIC/SIC. In that case any appellant/ complainant as well as PIO/AA will get proper information regarding hearing date or any related matter. That way the harassment , as mentioned by aamaami , could easily be avoided.

[karira]

Here is one more instance of the CIC asking the PA to compensate the appellant:

http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_19022008_02.pdf

In view of the above, it is directed that within 1 week from the date of the receipt of this order, the head of the public authority, viz. the Chairman & Managing Director, shall pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) only as compensation for the detriment suffered by the complainant. The head of the public authority shall be free, should he so decide, to recover this amount from the officers and staff responsible for misplacing the complainant’s RTI-petition. He shall report compliance to the Commission within 1 week of having effected the payment to the complainant.

[aamaadmi]

Mr. Abhijeet has, no doubt, given a good suggestion, but very often the Internet is non-functional and as in my case, the Speed Post did not reach me, I feel, it should be obligatory on the part of the party requesting postponement to send a copy of the request to the other party as well along with that of the CIC/SIC.
aamaadmi

[adil85]

Originally Posted by Debashis Basu

I am in full agreement with Dr Kushal Pathak that the scope of section 20(1) of RTA ACT must be enlarged to include Appellate Authority (who hears the first appeal) under a parallel Rs 250/- per day penalty which will be a concurrent penalty with the department PIO / SPIO.

This will decrease the official brotherhood and hence agreement with PIO / SPIO of the department and reject/ refuse information sought under RTI ACT on one pretext or the other.

Proper action by Appellate Authority (who hears first appeal) will definitely reduce the load on SIC / CIC.

WHAT ABOUT revision of the amount of penalty in view of the Pay Commission report? Time frame for disposal of the final appeal by CIC is also required in RTI act. After all the CIC gets a fat salary and perks which is from our money, hence he should also be made accountable. Moreover, if CIC is incapable of coping with pending appeals , the Government may introduce the provision to appoint honorary Information Commissioners from the eminent cizens of the society (and not retired officials). There are many worthy people who can work efficiently and judiciously.
adil

[narayanvarma]

I don't think that it is necessary to amend RTI Act for the purpose mentioned in this Thread:
please refer RTI annual report 2005-06 0f CIC.In chapter 3 it is stated that CIC has power to "impose any of the penalties provided under this Act". PL. SEE SECTION 19 (8) which provides such power read with

clause (e) thereof.
IF this is true then it is the issue of implementation and not the amendment.

[vijendra singh]

Only one suggestion is more than enough. Remove the existing non-deserving , dishonest, passive, anti-citizen I.Cs. & then gentlemen , deserving, honest , diligent, citizen-friendly , strict rule abiding I. Cs. having highest integrity to be recruited . All problems will be solved automatically within 1 month. But then the erring PIOs alongwith govt will cry .

[hkdubey]

Now it is found that the FAA, generally Concurs to the descision of PIO basing on his reply and without going through the act. The Rule should be changed such that if there is a 2nd appeal and PIO is fpund guilty the FAA should also be treated as guilty for not doing his duty diligently. This will reduce brother hood of safe guarding PIo and will reduce the appeal to CIC too.

[vashisthvivek]

Originally Posted by hkdubey

Now it is found that the FAA, generally Concurs to the descision of PIO basing on his reply and without going through the act. The Rule should be changed such that if there is a 2nd appeal and PIO is fpund guilty the FAA should also be treated as guilty for not doing his duty diligently. This will reduce brother hood of safe guarding PIo and will reduce the appeal to CIC too.

Good suggestion.

[taurus]

The decisions of the various authorities, be it the PIO, the FAA or even the SIC or CIC, all are based on their appreciation of the facts presented to them and their own judgement. They are not infallible. That is why so many layers of authorities are provided. Hence, we cannot punish one authority if the other differs from the former. Such a system does not exist even in judiciary or in the normal administrative channels even.

[vijendra singh]

tAURAS, But such system was made by foreign rulers. Actually such arrangment is very much LETHAL to the citizenary always. Let the PIO commit a mistake knowingly to harm the applicant. Later the AA , CIC also harmed the citizen knowingly . Then aggrieved citizen will approach to HIGH COURT. Suppose here also , he could not get fair justice. Then by selling his house property , the aggrieved or say weakened appellant can go to SUPREME COURT where possibility of fair decision will be maximum, say 100 %. Thus innocent citizen had been befooled/ damaged significantly for many many years without his fault .It should be evident then that The PIO ; the AA ; the CIC ; High Court all the four neglected their duties malafidely & therefor as per rules of civilised society ,those all 4 must be punishable certainly.Supreme court rightly said on 05.08.08 that God will save this country.

[hkdubey]

Originally Posted by vijendra singh

tAURAS, But such system was made by foreign rulers. Actually such arrangment is very much LETHAL to the citizenary always. Let the PIO commit a mistake knowingly to harm the applicant. Later the AA , CIC also harmed the citizen knowingly . Then aggrieved citizen will approach to HIGH COURT. Suppose here also , he could not get fair justice. Then by selling his house property , the aggrieved or say weakened appellant can go to SUPREME COURT where possibility of fair decision will be maximum, say 100 %. Thus innocent citizen had been befooled/ damaged significantly for many many years without his fault .It should be evident then that The PIO ; the AA ; the CIC ; High Court all the four neglected their duties malafidely & therefor as per rules of civilised society ,those all 4 must be punishable certainly.Supreme court rightly said on 05.08.08 that God will save this country.

You are correct But in my view perhaps God cannot save this country. India is not a country of General Citizens but It is a country of Few powerful men with vested interest and all citizens of india are there servant.

[hkdubey]

Certainly there are many lacuna in the act. And the discussion is also right, I hope with time the act will be refined.
This forum has got great responsibility in front of it. To make the act popular and at the same time to see that act is refined.
1. It is almost impossible to reach CIC for appeal for general public for second appeal. It should be easy so that there will be fear amongst the PIO an FAA that party will go for an appeal . Now many general public cannot appeal to CIC as it is costly due to distance, as well as difficult. as it is already discussed in this forum to and fro charges to New Delhi stay at Delhi etc makes a general public not think of appeal. He is forced to be happy with the decision of PIO/FAA.
2. If one PIO is found guilty of not giving the reply and FAA blindly suppoting without going to depth and without hearing an applicant, he must be penalised. This will reduce number of appeal to CIC.
3. The rule should be such if a query is of general nature in addition to supplying the information, that should be published publically in official where every one can see/web site of the organisation. So that duplication of query will not be there.

4. It is seen that many Govt organisation is yet has not published as per section 4 b of the act they must be penalised.
5. In case a Govt office is going for appeal the cost must be borne by the official personally.

[sidmis]

I propose the following:

• Eliminate First Appellate Stage. Instead all RTI Replies must be approved by the Head of the Institutions. (Saves at least 45 days)
• In case of default penalise both the PIO and the person who has endorsed it. (They will think twice)
• Eliminate the distinction between State and Central Public Authority.
• Instead all RTI disuputes at state level should be handled by the State Commissions.No need of a central commission.
• Fix a time limit say 60 days within which the State commission should hear and give decisions. Impose penalty on delay.
• Create special RTI benches at the High Courts to hear cases related to RTI.

more to follow..

[vashisthvivek]

Originally Posted by sidmis

I propose the following:

• Eliminate First Appellate Stage. Instead all RTI Replies must be approved by the Head of the Institutions. (Saves at least 45 days)
• In case of default penalise both the PIO and the person who has endorsed it. (They will think twice)
• Eliminate the distinction between State and Central Public Authority.
• Instead all RTI disuputes at state level should be handled by the State Commissions.No need of a central commission.
• Fix a time limit say 60 days within which the State commission should hear and give decisions. Impose penalty on delay.
• Create special RTI benches at the High Courts to hear cases related to RTI.

more to follow..

I liked 3rd and 4th suggestions very much. Although the Central Information Commission may be there, but the scheme should be like Consumer Dispute Redressal system, where appeal from the State commission goes to the Central Commission and then directly to Supreme Court. However, this will be fruitful only when the appointments in the Commissions are made as per the scheme of the Act and not by appointing the bureaucrats only. As regards to providing the information after vetting by the Head of the Department, the same may not be feasible, as it will burden the the HODs to a great extent. They will not be able to give due attention towards other developmental and important works. However, senior officers of the organisation should be appointed as PIOs, as at present junior officers are appointed as PIOs, who mostly work under pressure. Secondly, there should be provision to penalise the Appellate Authority also for delay and for passing misleading orders or for orders passed without application of mind.

[vashisthvivek]

The RTI Act provides that the information should be provided as expeditiously as possible, however, the trend is to provide the information only at the fag end of the time limit of 30 days. Therefore, I propose that it should be made mandatory for the PIO to provide the details of the day to day actions taken in disposing of the application, alongwith the information. This will keep check on those PIOs, who delays the information unnecessarily.

[abhi987]

I had suggested earlier also. I feel that proceedings of SIC/CIC should be covered live on television like parliamentary proceedings.

This will usher in a revolution, and neither the AA has to be penalised nor the SIC/CIC time limits need to be fixed to deliver a judgment.

While travelling abroad I have noticed that, those countries have fixed cameras on each and every traffic signal, the moment the signal turns red and if one crosses the signal the camera will click photograph of the driver as well as number plate of the vehicle with a huge flash.

Later on one will receive the challan at his address along with the photograph proof. Fine Indian Rs.6000/- along with demerit points which will accumlate in case of repeated offence.

I have seen quite a few vehicles coming to screeching halt once the signal turns red. The rule gets implemented very successfully.

There is difference between RTI and Court Cases (Lower court, Appleant court, High court, Supreme court) and so I feel it is possible to cover RTI proceedings live whereas it would be difficult in case of Court cases. I have tried to list the differences below in favour of making RTI proceedings live. Please correct me in case of a mistake. I would also appreciate if one can add further points.

1. RTI is a quasi judicial procedure whereas Court proceedings are judicial in nature.

2. RTI is simply right to information (disseminates info) whereas court cases decide what and who is right or wrong.

3. RTI except where the queries fall under the provisions of sec.8 & 11, every citizen has a right to know without any reason or locus standi, so no harm in everybody getting to know the information as such everybody had the right to know.

4. RTI does not change the status of a particular case whereas court judgment can change the status of a case.

5. Under RTI a citizen is simply seeking information which any and every one has a right to know and I suppose once having recd the info, one can publish it without any copyright issues whereas in a court case one may have levelled serious allegations which one may not be able to prove later on and the person against whom the allegations were levelled may get defamed till the verdict is delivered in his favor.

[R K Garg]

We are talking about improvement in RTI Act for better functioning.I will lik to point out that that is lack of awraeness among the most educated people also.Procative disclosures have not be made,placed at a right place and updated.We should work to spread awareness and than see the result.Awaz aganst delays and proper thinking of provisions and to take action strictly as per law and not mox RTI with civil law will get us better results.If all applicants work strictly in accordance with prevailing provisions the PIO and AA will be firced to work and see the result no one will need to ask for a cahnge but govt will itself make it to functional.

R K Garg

[colnrkurup]

Look at it from a different angle. What happens if one read in the news paper that " State Information Commission fine Tahsildar,............. Rs.10,000/- (@ Rs.250/- per day ) for causing the delay of 40 days in providing the information requested by Sri..... under RTI Act" ? Even those who have no interest in the RTI Act will be too inquisitive to find out as to how it is done. Those interested will go out of the way to learn everything and use it. Professional helpline, RTI Consultant and Advisors will emerge without any more publicity or awareness.

In nut shell what is required is RESULT. Only the Information Commissions can help us. Of course media can play vital role in giving wider publicity on dismal performance/ non-performance of the commissions compelling the Politicians and our Rulers to take the RTI Act seriously. They can make the Commission function in such a way that they dispose off a case at least by 6 months and act strictly in accordance with Section 20 of the Act in penalising the PIOs found guilty.

I do not find any other solution.

[hkdubey]

Originally Posted by colnrkurup

Look at it from a different angle. What happens if one read in the news paper that " State Information Commission fine Tahsildar,............. Rs.10,000/- (@ Rs.250/- per day ) for causing the delay of 40 days in providing the information requested by Sri..... under RTI Act" ? Even those who have no interest in the RTI Act will be too inquisitive to find out as to how it is done. Those interested will go out of the way to learn everything and use it. Professional helpline, RTI Consultant and Advisors will emerge without any more publicity or awareness.

In nut shell what is required is RESULT. Only the Information Commissions can help us. Of course media can play vital role in giving wider publicity on dismal performance/ non-performance of the commissions compelling the Politicians and our Rulers to take the RTI Act seriously. They can make the Commission function in such a way that they dispose off a case at least by 6 months and act strictly in accordance with Section 20 of the Act in penalising the PIOs found guilty.

I do not find any other solution.

Penalising??? Non fears now a days, There must be departmental proceeding as per section 20.
In trains there is afine of Rs 200 for smoking within the Railway area and coaches.
One gentleman was found smoking in the A?C Coach and he was fined with Rs 200/-
after 2 Hrs, the same gentleman called the coach attender took out 200/- and paid him and told I want to smoke.
This is the case of fine. So for Such PIOs and FAA disciplinary proceeding is the only way as per section 20(2).