Vijaya Dashmi, 12 December 2005, will go down in Indian history as the day which gave citizens the right to realise Swaraj or freedom in the real sense. This has been made possible by the implementation of Act 22 of 2005 the Right to Information (RTI) Act, across the country. Earlier nine states had RTI Acts, most of them ineffective, barring Maharashtra and Delhi, where a few aware citizens had begun to use it effectively.
The tool of democracy
The ‘Right to Information’ is derived from our fundamental right to expression under Article 19. If we do not have information on how our Government and public institutions function, we cannot have an informed opinion about it. This has been accepted by various Supreme Court judgments since 1977. All of us accept that the freedom of press is an essential element for a democracy to function. It is worthwhile to understand the underlying assumption in this well entrenched belief. Why is the freedom of media considered as one of the essential features of a democracy? It is because democracy revolves around the basic idea of citizens being at the center of governance and the rule of the people. We need to define the importance of the concept of the freedom of press from this fundamental premise. It is obvious that the main reason for a free press is to ensure that citizens are well informed on all issues that concern them. If this is the main reason for the primacy given to the freedom of press, it clearly flows from this, that the citizens’ right to know is paramount. Also, since the Government is run on behalf of the people, they are the rightful owners, who have a right to be informed directly.
The Right to Information (RTI) Act is a powerful and the only tool that citizens can use to seek information from a public authority using a simple procedure by paying just Rs 10 and get what is due to them. Let me cite the example of a slum dweller, who cleverly used the Right to Information to get his ration card. When he applied for a new ration card, he was told that he would have to pay a bribe of Rs. 2000 to the officials. Our friend, the slum dweller, who was aware of RTI, simply smiled and applied for the card without offering any bribe or groveling in front of the officials. He had made up his mind to be the enforcer of good governance. He found out that the bribe-givers got their ration cards in about four weeks. He waited for ten weeks, and then applied for information about his card status under RTI, using the simple format with an application fee of Rs. 10, which he submitted to the Public Information Officer of the Food and Supply office. He had asked up to which date applications for ration cards had been cleared, and the daily progress report of his application. This shook up the corrupt officials, since the answer would reveal that they had given ration cards to others who had applied after him, which would be conclusive evidence that they had no justification for delaying his card. His story had an happy ending: The ration card was promptly given to him. There are a thousand such examples where citizens have used RTI effectively to get information about road repairs, electricity connection, admissions in educational institutions, etc.
RTI is your right
The Right to Information Act is a codification of this important right of citizens. The right existed since the time India became a republic, but was difficult to enforce without going to Court. The Act and its rules define a format for seeking information, a time period within which information must be provided (30 days), method of giving the information, some charges for applying (`10), and ten exemptions of information which will not be given to citizens. The principle is that charges should be minimum, more as a token. They are not at all representative of the costs, which may be incurred. Citizens can ask for information by getting photocopies of documents, permissions, policies and decisions. Inspection of files can also be done and samples can be asked for. All administrative offices of public authorities have to appoint ‘Public Information Officers (PIO).’ Citizens apply to the Public Information Officer of the concerned office for information. If it is not provided or wrongly refused, citizens can appeal to an Appellate Authority, who would be an official in the same department, senior to the PIO. If this too does not give a satisfactory result, one can appeal to the State or Central Information Commissioner, which is an independent Constitutional Authority, being established under the Act. One of the major reasons for the success of the RTI Act is that there is a provision for penalising the PIO in case he does not give the information within the mandated period. The RTI Act provides for a penalty for delay on the PIO at a rate of ` 250 per day of delay. There is also a provision for disciplinary action, against recalcitrant PIOs in some cases. Thus RTI provides for a time bound and defined process for citizens to access information about all actions taken by public authorities. The penal provisions on the PIO are the real teeth of the Act, which ensure that the PIO cannot treat citizen’s demands for information in a cavalier manner.
Effective use of RTI will usher in participative democracy
I have myself used the Right to Information a number of times. In one case, where a police inspector who had raped a minor was reinstated in service within five months was dismissed from service using RTI as a pressure device. In another instance, proof has been obtained about political interference in police transfers, and I am using this to curb this nefarious practice. The major fraud by unscrupulous elements of looting money meant for providing livelihood under the Employment Guarantee Scheme (EGS) of the government, has been going on for years. Presently a campaign has been initiated in Maharashtra, to get citizens across the state to ask for EGS muster rolls using RTI, and then auditing them with people’s participation. The primary power of RTI is the fact it empowers individual citizens to seek information. Hence without necessarily forming pressure groups or associations, it puts power directly into the hands of the foundation of democracy – the Citizen.
Citizens should however know that information is what exists on record and the PIO is not expected to give what is not on record. A good RTI application has to be brief and focused and should not have any malicious content. As we ask for details of illegal acts or wrongdoings, and also about the basis and laws based on which actions are taken, we will be able to transform ourselves into a truly participative democracy, which works for the citizens. We as individuals have the power and the responsibility of bringing good governance by using and spreading the use of RTI. Going beyond stopping corruption and getting citizens their rightful due, RTI also lends itself to being used by citizens to address issues of governance and a rational basis for public policy. Indian citizens have an opportunity to realise ‘Swaraj’ – true and enlightened self-governance, which they missed in 1947. The responsibility of ensuring that the RTI Act will deliver its potential rests with us. We need to build an awareness to seize this opportunity through a sustained campaign – a National Campaign for People’s Right to Information.
[/column][column size=”4/5″]
Shailesh Gandhi
The writer is former Central Information Commissioner. A Distinguished Alumnus awardee of IIT Bombay and a first generation entrepreneur, he sold his business to become a RTI activist in 2003. He gave many landmark decisions on RTI, apart from organising the first digital fileless Commission office.[/column]