Right to Information (RTI) Act was a landmark legislation that contributed to the democratic dispensation of our country and the State as it meant devolution of right to the ordinary citizens of India. The significance of this right lies in the fact that Governments are usually reticent in providing any information to the people who seek it. When a minister is inducted into office after taking oath of secrecy, he is under the impression that all that he sees, hears or says is of highest secrecy and should never be shared with a third person. This impression remains embedded in the mind. However, a distinction has to be made between what is to be divulged and what is to be kept back. It is true that the Government has to be secretive in some matters, especially those pertaining to security and sensitivity of the state. It is for the functionary, a bureaucrat or a minister to make clear in his mind the distinction between what can be disclosed and what cannot be disclosed.
By and large, people are not really interested in scratching secrets from the Government. They are essentially interested in knowing the status of their personal/collateral/social cases that have a bearing on their future and the future of society. We, therefore, expect that Government will not try to take shelter behind the oath of secrecy plank but on merits of the case.
Right to information is not to be seen necessarily from the standpoint of pillorying the Government. Its important manifestation is that of strengthening the democratic system and infusing confidence in a voter that he is empowered to seek information that would convince him he is on the right track. In the follow up action to the Act, the State constituted the State Information Commission with Chief Information Commissioner assisted by two Information Commissioners. Looking in retrospect, one may say that the Commission had somewhat unsmooth beginning and had to overcome a number of initial hiccups before it would find itself in real functioning position. These odds included logistics as well for which it had to almost beg the Government. An impression, right or wrong, was created that the Government was not really and out of heart cooperating with the Commission or to put it in crude words was not happy that it should become something of a policeman overlooking the working and the decisions of the Government. In pragmatic terms, the Commission never aspired to be either a policeman or a watchdog over the administration. Nevertheless, it had to mind the business of ensuring that parties seeking information on a variety of cases were not disappointed or that the Government did not conceal information from the general public if it was in the interests of the people. Maybe at times some complaints were brought to the Commission by aggrieved parties. Obviously the Commission is enjoined by constitution to respond to these grievances if these are against the administration. It has to seek the report of the administration and thus carry on the process under rules. Nobody, especially no administrative branch should be offended if the Commission seeks information in a particular case.
An impression has been created that the Government is not interested in the Commission conducting its duties and functions. This is a crude way of saying that the Government is against its own organ. On the face of it, there appears little sense in this kind of impression. But the ground situation creates doubts and thee have to be removed. One Information Commissioner retired a year ago and the post remains vacant ever since. Why should it remain vacant is the question. Why is not the Government serious about make the Commission rightly functional? Leaving the post vacant for a long time obviously means that the Government is not interested in the organization. Then the Chief Information Commissioner Sofi retired in February last. His post also remains vacant till date. The GAD has not so far drawn a panel of names to be considered for appointment of CIC. What does this mean? Does it not reinforce the impression that the administration is not really interested in making the Commission functional? What can a headless organization do to mitigate the grievances of the people or the parties? The administration is happy that it has got rid of headache called State Information Commission.
The third jolt to the Commission is now in the offing and when that happens, the Commission will die natural death or that it will be put in the cold store. The lone Information Commissioner is about to retire in a month or so. After his retirement, the doors of the Commission will be locked and the only body that will be happy will be the administration because now nobody will be there to ask them to respond to the query of people looking for right to information.
We fail to understand why the administration has been meting out scurvy treatment to this important organization? The Commission is put under the temporary charge of an incumbent which in itself is a reflection. It means that the Government does not attach due importance to the post and therefore has allowed someone to hold its temporary charge. Government’s stubbornness in not providing necessary wherewithal to the Commission is to be found in the Government trivializing the directive of the High Court which has impressed upon the Government to fill the vacant posts of CIC and IC and make the organization functional. As per the provisions of J&K Right to Information Act, the Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioner shall be appointed by the Governor on the recommendations of a committee consisting of Chief Minister, who shall be Chairperson of the committee, Leader of Opposition in the Legislative Assembly and a Cabinet Minister to be nominated by the Chief Minister as its Members. This exercise has not been made so far and there is no indication when the Government will move in this direction. In such a situation transparency becomes the casualty.
It is a matter of disappointment to the citizens that an organization that was supposed to protect and enforce their rights has been paralyzed through the cleverness of administration. There is somebody somewhere in the entire scenario that is behind the process obstructing it. We implore the Government to take this matter as serious violation of the rights of the citizens. The court order has to be implemented and the State Information Commission has to be med fully and forcefully functional.
Follow our WhatsApp channel