Now, it's a celebrated fact that the TTMC's in Bangalore are the biggest case of mis-use of JNNURM funds, as has more or less been established in this blog. I thought I'll check out if they have at least been built in accordance with plans sanctioned by the BBMP, and, if so, also find out the quantum of municipal taxes they are paying, if any. Accordingly, I filed an RTI application with the BBMP PIO as per this, on 8th Nov'10. Receiving no response, I filed an appeal with the Commissioner, BBMP, on 8th Feb'11. Receiving no response from the Commissioner even, I filed an appeal with the Karnataka Information Commission on the 2nd July'11. I noticed that it got registered as Application no: KIC 7116 PTN 2011 dt 11/07/11, from their website.
Even as I had been waiting for the hearing to come up, on the 25th Feb, ie more than 7 months later, I received the letter, accessible here , from the KIC. From a reading of the contents, it is now quite clear that the KIC has transformed itself into what I am calling the Information Denial Facilitation Commission (KIDFC). Very clearly, the BBMP as well as the BMTC do not want to disclose the information asked for, and the KIDFC is facilitating this.
In the first place, the response was in Kannada. I have an issue with that, which matter has been gone into in detail here (please, nobody bring up that issue on this blog!). Since I can't read Kannada, I took it to somebody who could read the language. Generally, from a hearing, I can more or less get a sense of what is being read. But, the language used being of a level which even a 'Kuvempu' will have difficulty with, it took some ten readings between some five different people to get a fair idea of what the KIC (rather, KIDFC) was seeking to convey (rather, cover up).
The letter apparently dismisses my appeal for reasons ticked off in a standard format, very clearly indicating that this has become their routine practice now. This perhaps is the new strategy to "manage" an appellant when he persists past all the older tactics detailed here. In the instant case, the points ticked off are serialled at 2,3,4 & 6. And, the following are what they are supposedly seeking to convey:
2) The appeals have not been filed in triplicate;
3) Postal order copy not enclosed;
4) Proof of receipt of appeals not provided;
6) Complainant has approached the appellate authority directly before approaching the PIO.
At least some five cases of mine have already been disposed off by the KIC in the past, out of close to a hundred odd cases taken up under the RTI, most others closing at earlier stages, a fair number successfully. Never before had they raised such issues. Even if one were to comply with these demands, imagine the quantum of paper that will get wasted in the process. This is even as government organisations, like Railways, are today exhorting the public to travel with just "e-tickets" on mobile phones, with a view to saving over 3 lakh A-4 size sheets everyday. And, it is not as if the opposite party has contested the case on any of these issues. Very clearly, the KIC has, on its own, devised these ways to cover up for its masters in the government, obviously a result of the hijacking of the selection process (of the Commissioners) by the neta-babu combo.
When formulated and notified way back in 2005, the expectation then was that, by now, the governments would have moved to the proactive disclosures phase, as envisaged undrer the Act. In practice however the governments generally have been inventing newer and newer ways to emasculate the rights of the citizens, the latest doings almost completing the process, and converting the Karnataka Commission into a full-fledged KIDFC. Given this scenario, it no longer makes any meaning pursuing the RTI route.
The irony of it all is that this is all happening even as the government, on the other hand, is seeking to enact the Karnataka Guarantee of Services to Citizens Act, 2012 (check this). But, the approach being what it is, one feels skeptical as to where it is all leading.
Perhaps, it's time the Civil Society came together once again to assert the citizen's rights.
Muralidhar Rao
PS: Incidentally, the KIC website displays the yellow and crimson flag. But, according to the minister concerned, the state has no official flag - check this
Forward this Blog entry
Comments
This issue deserves a PIL!
Murali Sir,
This issues deserves a PIL. If this is left as is will becoem a precedent and the spirit of RTI will be lost. You have my fullest support if you decide to take the next steps either filing the alst appeal before the CIC or PIL in the court.
-Syed
Great insights Murali
disposal of RTI cases
BBMP commissioner M K Shankarlinge Gowda said he had discussed the increasing RTI queries with the information commissioner. - - - “Not all officials know how to dispose of the RTI cases. A workshop for BBMP officials to handle RTI applications will be held,” commissioner said.
For the full report in the ToI, click here.
"dispose off" - is one to believe then that the above was the route they decided upon?
Equally interesting are the following excerpts from the report in the New Indian express (click here to access it)
Councillors from various political parties raised their voice against RTI activists and alleged that they are misusing the tool at the BBMP Council meeting on Saturday. Yediyur ward councillor N R Ramesh said that many RTI activists are seeking information, which will not benefit the public in any manner. Ramesh said RTI activists are seeking information of the building plan of a house built in 20X30 site. “One cannot build a house 100 per cent as per the plan. There will be deviation here and there,” he said. - - - - Subashnagar Councillor said they are not able to take up projects which exceed `80 lakh at the Gandhinagar assembly constituency, as they are being harassed by RTI applicants. - - - - Kodigehalli Councillor, Ashwathnarayana Gowda said RTI applicants should produce details of their property before applying for RTI.
Replying to their query, Commissioner said not many officials of BBMP know about RTI appeals. “We will conduct a special workshop in dealing with RTI appeals from an expert for our officials in the Town Hall,” he said.
Well, if it is impractical to build a house conforming to the by-laws, why doesn't the Corporator ask for them to be amended.
Whatever, the Commissioner has stated that he is going to be holding a workshop to educate the Councillors on the provisions of the RTI. But, going by my experience, narrated above, perhaps he, as also the KIC itself, needs a better appreciation of the spirit behind the Act, besides an understanding of how to dispose of queries raised.
Only serving or retired judge to be CIC
The Supreme Court on Thursday directed that only a serving or retired chief justice of a high court or a judge of the apex court would be appointed as the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) to head the panel at the Centre and state level to decide complaints as well as appeal under the Right to Information Act (RTI), 2005.
To read the full text of the report in the Deccan Herald, click here.
Can one hope for changed outlook resulting out of this? - I wonder.
endorsement from Justice Hegde
While seeking Justice Santosh Hegde's opinion on the "right to response in English" issue (check here), and the Registrar of Societies issue (check here), I also sought his opinion on the matter of the delusive and duplicitous tactics adopted by the KIC, as brought out here. He stated that these were typical stone-walling tactics adopted by the bureucracy, and the KIC adopting them was totally against the spirit of the RTI Act.
Here, however, since there was no order issued, I expect I'll have to pursue the matter with the National Advisory Council (NAC), National Campaign for People’s Right to Information (NCPRI), etc, though my earlier approaches to them did not evoke a response. Will try again now, now that Justice Hgde has endorsed my stance.
calling the RTI bluff
His (Rahul Gandhi's) attempt to use RTI as a shield against corruption is understandable since the main blot on the Congress during UPA-II has been corruption. Sadly, Mr Gandhi’s claim that large number of scams were exposed due to the RTI, fails the test of scrutiny. Corruption worsened The first macro and well-accepted evidence of corruption in a country, comes from the Corruption Perception Index – an analysis put out by the world renowned Transparency International. The rankings show that a year after the RTI Act came into effect, India’s ranking amongst 177 countries of the world, has declined from a 2006 position of 70th to 72nd (2007), 85th (2008), and by the end of UPA-I in 2009, 84th. In UPA-II, it fell from 87th in 2010, to 95th (2011), 94th (2012) and has stayed there in 2013. In effect, perception worsened 24 positions down since the RTI Act.
Even countries such as Botswana, Bhutan, Rwanda, Senegal, and Mongolia fare better. Post the RTI Act 2005, corruption has become much worse in the eyes of a global expert organization on corruption, which is both neutral and credible. No scams uncovered The claim by Mr Gandhi that big scams have been uncovered because of the RTI again falls flat when tested against hard facts. India’s biggest scams which have sullied India’s reputation across the world have neither been stopped nor stand exposed due to the RTI.
For the full text of the article by Sri Rajeev Chandrasekhar, MP, in the FirstPost, click here.
The article further goes on to describe how RaGa's "system" has effectively emsculated the RTI. Not surprising that our Corruption Index has worsened considerably since RTI, for all the tall claims made.
Buttressing your point!
Murali,
You seemed to have piggy backed on Rajeev's aversion to RAGA. There is a comment to his blog that tears apart all that RC has written. RC's own lobbying against CDMA carriers has lot more to say about the skeletons in his cupbaord than he wants us to belive.
You seemed to have blindly followed the bandwagon of RC and Congress baiters to prove your point to say RTI is a bluff. Nobody has claimed that RTI is perfect tool and need no corrections. Your grudges should have been trained agianst the state's inability to impelment the RTI regime. As an ordinary citizen I have received reply for ecah oen of my RTI barring RTIs to Railways. This includes PMO, MoEA, MoMA etc. But on same account, I have not received single reply to my RTI's both in BJP and the current congress regime.
You are at liberty to discount each and every claim of RAGA, UPA and Congress. But calling RTI is erranous. The bluff is not in the act, but in people who are supposed to implement.
Here is the rebuttal for RC's blog:
GoK - the culprit
@ Syed - Yes, indeed what I have stated is largely on the basis of my experiences with state government agencies, and state information commission. The few queries I raised with Central government agencies, and one with a Kerala government agency, were answered promptly.