What goes around, comes around

This is interesting because High Court of Karnataka has upheld State Information Commission’s decision that information under control of governor’s office must be disclosed under RTI.  This is another step in favour of right to information.

http://expressbuzz.com/cities/bangalore/hc-blow-to-governor%E2%80%99s-office/178865.html

From recent news, here are some interesting tips and practical information from Kerala State information commission about RTI applications they handle.

http://expressbuzz.com/cities/thiruvananthapuram/%E2%80%98be-specific-while-seeking-info-under-rti-act/178839.html

PIOs were made under RTI act to make easy for applicants to get information.  However, some PIOs have seemingly made it their life’s calling to devise innovative ways on how to delay and thereby deny information.  Read the news below:

http://www.merinews.com/article/govt-officials-harassing-users-of-rti-act/15822595.shtml

A recent memorandum issued by DoPT (Department of Personnel and Training) clarifies that public information officer (PIO) under RTI Act does not have power to charge fees for mailing of information, or for overhead expenses collection and supply etc of information to applicant.

As part of ongoing classes to let people become aware of RTI (Right to Information) Act, a class on 9th May was held in L B Shastri Nagar, and here we will discuss the main points and discussions in that class.

Since the participants had some knowledge of RTI already, it was decided to focus more on advanced topics like grounds for rejection of RTI application, filing first appeals under RTI, and how to use RTI as part of overall activism.

Grounds for rejection of RTI application

It seems governor of AP is the latest to join the bandwagon of government people  crying about misuse of RTI.  See news below:

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/hyderabad/governor-says-rti-used-blackmail-tool-655

In recent judgement given by Chief Information Commissioner, the counsel representing Supreme Court has agreed that office of Chief Justice of India is a public authority as defined in Right to Information Act.  Full judgment of CIC is available here.  The relevant portions are given below, with important points in bold:

It is difficult to say why such proposed changes to Right to Information Act are given the branding as PM vs. Sonia which almost makes it look like some kind of drama, rather than making it into discussions involving citizen stakeholders beyond the top few powerful people of India.

http://www.dailypioneer.com/254636/PM-proposes-Sonia-disposes.html

It is not only the Chief Justice of India who wants his own office out of purview of RTI.  Even some of high courts are quite uncooperative about honouring RTI.

Following news story sums it all.  When it comes to implementation of right to information act (RTI), the courts are totally clueless and unhelpful to applicants.  The fact that this happened with a high court bench shows the high-handedness and aloofness which has become a characteristic of Indian judiciary.

The common response of many in public to any social initiative is that “it is not going to work”, “the system is too corrupt”, “it is all very good, but you are wasting your time”.