Don’t ask me ‘why’
| 
| 
By: Manu Moudgil
When it comes to RTI, it's easy to get disheartened. Rejection of applications, long time taken for CIC hearings or increase in application fee are just some of the factors due to which many avoid filing pleas. While not much can be done about the last two, just a little caution can help avoid rejection of your RTI application.Most of pleas suffer rejection because of poor drafting. A simple rule which many of us may forget is that RTI is just a tool to get information and it does not give you the power to question the actions of public authorities. That can be the next step once you get the information and use it against them. Also, the golden rule is the information you seek should be documented somewhere.
I remember reading a message on a yahoo group of which I am a member. An RTI applicant was blaming a government department for not replying to one of his several questions. The question was: "Why didn't the officials in your department bother to reply to any citizen's email like my mail on December 21, 2008?"
Here, the applicant is questioning the intent of officials which unfortunately won't be documented anywhere and hence no reply. The same question could have been framed to ask for a copy of the rules, instructions or notification which detail the procedure followed by officials to reply to emails by public. Then he can use these rules to question the officials further.
This was just an example and it also leads us to another rule which also can be the cornerstone of any kind of activism even beyond RTI: "Question the system, not the person". There is no single person who is responsible for corruption; it's a group of people who have found ways to hoodwink the system. So avoid personal attacks in your RTI application and ask for the rulebook as done above.
In an order dated April 21, 2006, the Central Information Commission rejected a plea of an applicant who had asked why the public authority had not amended certain rules and when, if at all, they would be amended. Another question was if the amendments are made would it have the retrospective effect. Rejection by CIC was on expected lines.
The application could have been better drafted to ask for a copy of rules, notification etc about the procedure for amendment of particular rules. Then he could use this as a proof that the concerned department has been lax.
Also practice extreme caution on use of certain terms. People generally put a poser asking for rules under which a particular action had been taken. The plea will be rejected with an explanation that there are no rules. But there can be a notification or a circular or an order or any other document pertaining to that subject. But you would not be told that. Keep in mind that most of the public information officers (PIOs) want to evade information. If seeking information on delay in processing of your file, ask who are the officers designated for your work and for how much time your file remained with them and what actions were taken but don't ask why. It should be followed by another plea asking, as per rules (if no rules, as per practice), how much time is taken for such work. If the officers are found delaying the work, put another plea asking what action is taken under rules/circulars/orders/notifications or any other document for such violations. Most of the time, the officials get the message and the petitioner is generally not required to pursue the matter further.
Since most of the applicants are those affected by a decision of the government departments, they most of the time know the answers as well as the excuses that can be feigned by the PIOs to deny the information. So, drafting should be in such a form that the excuses don't hold ground.
Another thing, which you all may already know is don't foray into grey areas listed in Section 8 and 9 of the RTI Act, which deals with the information pertaining to national security, private matters and foreign interests. The information sought should be in public interest. If the information pertains to more than one department, it's better to put two separate applications to save time and harassment. The RTI Act has the provision that if a plea is not accepted, the applicant can approach the appellant authority or get the complaint registered in a dispatch diary. In extreme cases, the Central Information Commission can be approached.
So happy filing and don't be disheartened even if your application is rejected. At least, officials would get to know that somebody is watching them and another RTI can be on its way lest they don't go by the rulebook.
|
Re: Don’t ask me ‘why’
Dec 29 2010 14:14:17 If the PIO is not providing the information, as requested under the RTI Act, the concerned applicant may file the appeal before the appellate authority. I am sure the appellate authority will pass the orders directing the PIO to provide the information or will pass a speaking order. In that case second appeal may also be filed before the State Information Commissioner.
|
#78 |
|
Don’t ask me ‘why’
Dec 04 2010 09:17:56 It is very confused matter, one side Act and DoPT has banned to ask questions like WHY, HOW and WHEN etc. Whereas The preamble of RTI Act "to bring transparency and accountability in working of public authority" how it will be possible if we don't ask a questions directly from PA.
The situation become past when public first approach to elected person and after that they were asking questions to government in Vidhan Sabha for any corrupt authority on our behalf and after that government ask clarification from that PA and act to punish accordingly. Now power has been de-centralised and government has given power directly to people to ask questions to PA so that accountabiliy may be fixed. |
#70 |
|
Re: Don’t ask me ‘why’
Nov 15 2010 06:33:43 In U.P. Dy Registrar/PIO Firms Societies Chits , Vikas Deep Lucknow is asking reasons to provide information and causing unnecessary delay.
What to do next? jagdevsdl@gmail.com |
#59 |
|
Don’t ask me ‘why’
Sep 28 2010 13:25:28 Under the RTI Act, one is free to ask for information from the Public Authority, which may be in public interest. The writer has rightly suggested that if the required information relates to two different departments/offices it will be better to file different applications. It is rightly pointed out that one can not ask the question of "WHY" since the RTI ACT does not gives the power to discuss or criticize the working of the authority from whom one is asking for information. However, the same information can be discussed for justifying right or wrong through the other courses of Law.
|
#54 |
You need to login or register to post comments.
Discuss this item on the forums. (4 posts)