04-07-2008, 05:41 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>CIC not transparent </b>
The Pioneer Edit Desk
How can it sit in judgement on others?
It is deeply unfortunate that the body responsible for examining complaints against public authorities under the Right to Information Act should itself be non-transparent in its workings. The preamble to the Right to Information Act, 2005 holds that democracy requires an informed citizenry and that transparency of information is vital to contain corruption and to hold accountable Governments and their instrumentalities to the governed. <b>The Central Information Commission has failed this test. It was exposed recently by an activist who found that the CIC was unable to furnish information about its own working when a query was put to it under the RTI Act. Most surprisingly, the staff of the CIC put up the same sort of resistance to parting with information which is a normal experience with Government departments and other public bodies and to correct which the CIC has been created. </b>The CIC was not able to furnish information about the number and status of cases and appeals pending before it. The reason given by the CIC is that it has maintained no records of judgements and orders or cases that are pending before it. This is a fault, and a serious one, in the running of the commission. The CIC had come in for stern criticism over its working, especially in its early months. There were reports of serious delays in deciding cases before it, which many times vitiated the very purpose of instituting an enquiry with public authorities in the first place. There is no doubt that the functioning of the CIC has improved over the months and there have even been some important interventions by it in favour of the people's right to information. Yet delays persist amid fears that the CIC may develop a backlog much like our courts.
A better appreciation of the functioning of the CIC might have been possible had it maintained records of its work, which it has not bothered to do. Now that it has been exposed as being no different from Government departments,<b> Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah has issued orders to maintain records. It remains to be seen whether the orders will be implemented or simply filed and forgotten. It is not in the interest of our country if the CIC functions inefficiently. </b>The RTI Act is at the teething stage of its implementation. There are many problems with its administration, including that of frivolous petitions. All these require the urgent attention of the information commissioners, who have instead whiled their time away - at the expense of tax-payers - unnecessarily pontificating in public on issues outside their jurisdiction.Â
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Pioneer Edit Desk
How can it sit in judgement on others?
It is deeply unfortunate that the body responsible for examining complaints against public authorities under the Right to Information Act should itself be non-transparent in its workings. The preamble to the Right to Information Act, 2005 holds that democracy requires an informed citizenry and that transparency of information is vital to contain corruption and to hold accountable Governments and their instrumentalities to the governed. <b>The Central Information Commission has failed this test. It was exposed recently by an activist who found that the CIC was unable to furnish information about its own working when a query was put to it under the RTI Act. Most surprisingly, the staff of the CIC put up the same sort of resistance to parting with information which is a normal experience with Government departments and other public bodies and to correct which the CIC has been created. </b>The CIC was not able to furnish information about the number and status of cases and appeals pending before it. The reason given by the CIC is that it has maintained no records of judgements and orders or cases that are pending before it. This is a fault, and a serious one, in the running of the commission. The CIC had come in for stern criticism over its working, especially in its early months. There were reports of serious delays in deciding cases before it, which many times vitiated the very purpose of instituting an enquiry with public authorities in the first place. There is no doubt that the functioning of the CIC has improved over the months and there have even been some important interventions by it in favour of the people's right to information. Yet delays persist amid fears that the CIC may develop a backlog much like our courts.
A better appreciation of the functioning of the CIC might have been possible had it maintained records of its work, which it has not bothered to do. Now that it has been exposed as being no different from Government departments,<b> Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah has issued orders to maintain records. It remains to be seen whether the orders will be implemented or simply filed and forgotten. It is not in the interest of our country if the CIC functions inefficiently. </b>The RTI Act is at the teething stage of its implementation. There are many problems with its administration, including that of frivolous petitions. All these require the urgent attention of the information commissioners, who have instead whiled their time away - at the expense of tax-payers - unnecessarily pontificating in public on issues outside their jurisdiction.Â
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->