The Amendment in RTI Act and the Why there is Strong Opposition against Amendment
Background of RTI:- India has one of the best Right to Information Act in the World. The original bill was introduced by the then UPA Government in December 2004 by MOS Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Suresh Pachouri. The bill was then referred to Parliamentary Standing Committee for detail scrutiny. The committee was headed by E.M. Sudarsana Natchiappan. The committee heard several eminent experts, several prominent NGOs, Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions and gone through clause by clause discussion and submitted its report in March 2005. The Parliament then passed the amended bill unanimously and citizens of India got Right to Information in 2005.
RTI covers every public authority. It is a tool which gives access of information from recruitment in various Government posts to subsidy to government expenditure on different projects to pension beneficiary to all the information that affects ordinary citizen's life except the information which comes under Official Secrets Act 1923 and other similar laws. Since passage, as per the estimate almost six million citizens use RTI annually and the rejection rate is also very low. The estimated rejection rate in 2017-18 was 6%.
RTI increases transparency and increased transparency creates pressure.But here Section 4 of the original act plays key role which directs all the public offices to maintain their records in proper manner, provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, disseminate all materials taking into consideration the cost effectiveness, local language and the most effective method of communication in that local area etc.
Amendments Introduced in the Parliament:- The Right to Information (Amendment) Bill, 2019 was introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of State for Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Mr. Jitendra Singh, on July 19, 2019. Lok Sabha passed the bill on July 22 and Rajya Sabha passed on July 25 amid strong opposition from Congress and other opposition parties. The opposition demanded the bill to be send to Parliamentary Standing Committee for detail scrutiny. In Rajya Sabha the motion was moved by the opposition to send this bill to Standing Committee. But the motion was negated after the division as 75 votes were in favour of motion and 117 were against. The Government got support from TRS, BJD and YSRCP. After that the Congress and other opposition members walked out.
There are three amendments proposed in this "Right to Information (Amendment) Bill, 2019". The amendments are proposed in Section 13, 16 and 27 of the original "Right to Information Act 2005".
Amendments of Section 13:-
1. The amendment removes the fix office term for Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioner. The amendment in section 2(a) & (b) says,
"for the words "for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office", the words "for such term as may be prescribed by the Central Government" shall be substituted;"
2. Section 2(c) deals with the salaries and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners. It says,
"The salaries and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government"
The concerns raised around amendment of Section 13:-
1. Section 13 of the original act deals with the "Term of office and conditions of service of Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners". It allows Chief Information Commissioner to hold the office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office or till the time he attains the age of sixty-five, whichever is earlier i.e this clause fixes the term of Chief Information Commissioner. Also this section prohibits the reappointment of the same person for same post. Same applies for the Information Commissioner. In these terms this clause provides autonomy to the institution and avoids favoritism as the Government of the day neither can remove Chief Information Commissioner nor reappoint the same for the second tenure. But now as per the amendment the term will be prescribed by the Central Government i.e it will undermine independence and boost favoritism.
2. The salaries, allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of the service of Chief Information Commissioner is same as the Chief Election Officer and an Information Commissioner is same as Election Commissioner as per the original 2005 act. However in the original bill drafted in 2004, the salaries, allowances and terms & conditions of the service were same as the Secretaries of the Ministry but this clause was amended after the recommendation of the Parliamentary Standing Committee. The committee in its report stated,
"The Committee is of the view that the Central Information Commission is an important creation under the Act which will execute the laudable scheme of the legislation and will hold an all India responsibility for this. It should, therefore, be ensured that it functions with utmost independence and autonomy. The Committee feels that to achieve this objective, it will be desirable to confer on the Information Commissioner and Deputy Information Commissioners, status of the Chief Election Commissioner and the Election Commissioner, respectively. The Committee, accordingly, recommends insertion of a suitable provision in the clause to this effect."
But now after the amendment the salary, the allowance payable to and the terms & conditions of the service will be depended upon the Government of the day.
Amendments of Section 16:-
1. The amendment removes the fix office term for State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioner. The amendment in section 3(a) & (b) says,
"for the words "for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office", the words "for such term as may be prescribed by the Central Government" shall be substituted;"
2. Section 3(c) deals with the salaries and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners. It says,
" The salaries and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of the State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioners shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government"
The concerns raised around amendment of Section 16:-
1. Section 16 of the original act deals with the "Term of office and conditions of service of State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners". It allows State Chief Information Commissioner to hold the office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office or till the time he attains the age of sixty-five, whichever is earlier i.e this clause fixes the term of State Chief Information Commissioner. Also this section prohibits the reappointment of the same person for same post. Same applies for the State Information Commissioner. Again as mentioned above the concerns around this amendment is autonomy and independence of the institution.
2. Another concern raised by some of the States against the amendment in Section 16 is that the bill gives power to decide the term of State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners to Central Government. Also the salary, allowances payable to and terms & conditions of service of State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners will also be decided by Central Government. So it undermines the Federalism Structure and State powers.
Amendments of Section 27:-
This amendment inserts below two clauses in Section 27 - sub section(2) after clause (c).
"(ca) the term of office of the Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners under sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 13 and the State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners under sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 16;
(cb) the salaries, allowances and other terms and conditions of service of the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners under sub-section (5) of section 13 and the State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioners under sub-section (5) of section 16;".
The concerns raised around amendment of Section 27:-
Section 27 of the original act deals with the power to make rules by appropriate Government i,e the appropriate Government by notification in the Official Gazette can make rules to carry out the provisions of this Act. Now in the amendment two additional clauses are added which deal with the term of office of the Chief Information Commissioner & Information Commissioners and State Chief Information Commissioner & the State Information Commissioners.
So now as the Centre has appropriated powers to notify term of office, it can get rid of uncomfortable commissioners with ease, making this act comparatively weaker than the original act.
Stay tuned for more updates. Feel free to comment.
This blog is now on Telegam. For reports on Economics, Current Affairs and more, subscribe this blog on Telegam.
Political Crisis in Karnataka | Key Events Occurred so far
RTI covers every public authority. It is a tool which gives access of information from recruitment in various Government posts to subsidy to government expenditure on different projects to pension beneficiary to all the information that affects ordinary citizen's life except the information which comes under Official Secrets Act 1923 and other similar laws. Since passage, as per the estimate almost six million citizens use RTI annually and the rejection rate is also very low. The estimated rejection rate in 2017-18 was 6%.
RTI increases transparency and increased transparency creates pressure.But here Section 4 of the original act plays key role which directs all the public offices to maintain their records in proper manner, provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, disseminate all materials taking into consideration the cost effectiveness, local language and the most effective method of communication in that local area etc.
Amendments Introduced in the Parliament:- The Right to Information (Amendment) Bill, 2019 was introduced in Lok Sabha by the Minister of State for Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Mr. Jitendra Singh, on July 19, 2019. Lok Sabha passed the bill on July 22 and Rajya Sabha passed on July 25 amid strong opposition from Congress and other opposition parties. The opposition demanded the bill to be send to Parliamentary Standing Committee for detail scrutiny. In Rajya Sabha the motion was moved by the opposition to send this bill to Standing Committee. But the motion was negated after the division as 75 votes were in favour of motion and 117 were against. The Government got support from TRS, BJD and YSRCP. After that the Congress and other opposition members walked out.
There are three amendments proposed in this "Right to Information (Amendment) Bill, 2019". The amendments are proposed in Section 13, 16 and 27 of the original "Right to Information Act 2005".
Amendments of Section 13:-
1. The amendment removes the fix office term for Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioner. The amendment in section 2(a) & (b) says,
"for the words "for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office", the words "for such term as may be prescribed by the Central Government" shall be substituted;"
2. Section 2(c) deals with the salaries and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners. It says,
"The salaries and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government"
The concerns raised around amendment of Section 13:-
1. Section 13 of the original act deals with the "Term of office and conditions of service of Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners". It allows Chief Information Commissioner to hold the office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office or till the time he attains the age of sixty-five, whichever is earlier i.e this clause fixes the term of Chief Information Commissioner. Also this section prohibits the reappointment of the same person for same post. Same applies for the Information Commissioner. In these terms this clause provides autonomy to the institution and avoids favoritism as the Government of the day neither can remove Chief Information Commissioner nor reappoint the same for the second tenure. But now as per the amendment the term will be prescribed by the Central Government i.e it will undermine independence and boost favoritism.
2. The salaries, allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of the service of Chief Information Commissioner is same as the Chief Election Officer and an Information Commissioner is same as Election Commissioner as per the original 2005 act. However in the original bill drafted in 2004, the salaries, allowances and terms & conditions of the service were same as the Secretaries of the Ministry but this clause was amended after the recommendation of the Parliamentary Standing Committee. The committee in its report stated,
"The Committee is of the view that the Central Information Commission is an important creation under the Act which will execute the laudable scheme of the legislation and will hold an all India responsibility for this. It should, therefore, be ensured that it functions with utmost independence and autonomy. The Committee feels that to achieve this objective, it will be desirable to confer on the Information Commissioner and Deputy Information Commissioners, status of the Chief Election Commissioner and the Election Commissioner, respectively. The Committee, accordingly, recommends insertion of a suitable provision in the clause to this effect."
But now after the amendment the salary, the allowance payable to and the terms & conditions of the service will be depended upon the Government of the day.
Amendments of Section 16:-
1. The amendment removes the fix office term for State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioner. The amendment in section 3(a) & (b) says,
"for the words "for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office", the words "for such term as may be prescribed by the Central Government" shall be substituted;"
2. Section 3(c) deals with the salaries and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners. It says,
" The salaries and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of the State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioners shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government"
The concerns raised around amendment of Section 16:-
1. Section 16 of the original act deals with the "Term of office and conditions of service of State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners". It allows State Chief Information Commissioner to hold the office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office or till the time he attains the age of sixty-five, whichever is earlier i.e this clause fixes the term of State Chief Information Commissioner. Also this section prohibits the reappointment of the same person for same post. Same applies for the State Information Commissioner. Again as mentioned above the concerns around this amendment is autonomy and independence of the institution.
2. Another concern raised by some of the States against the amendment in Section 16 is that the bill gives power to decide the term of State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners to Central Government. Also the salary, allowances payable to and terms & conditions of service of State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners will also be decided by Central Government. So it undermines the Federalism Structure and State powers.
Amendments of Section 27:-
This amendment inserts below two clauses in Section 27 - sub section(2) after clause (c).
"(ca) the term of office of the Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners under sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 13 and the State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners under sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 16;
(cb) the salaries, allowances and other terms and conditions of service of the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners under sub-section (5) of section 13 and the State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioners under sub-section (5) of section 16;".
The concerns raised around amendment of Section 27:-
Section 27 of the original act deals with the power to make rules by appropriate Government i,e the appropriate Government by notification in the Official Gazette can make rules to carry out the provisions of this Act. Now in the amendment two additional clauses are added which deal with the term of office of the Chief Information Commissioner & Information Commissioners and State Chief Information Commissioner & the State Information Commissioners.
So now as the Centre has appropriated powers to notify term of office, it can get rid of uncomfortable commissioners with ease, making this act comparatively weaker than the original act.
Stay tuned for more updates. Feel free to comment.
This blog is now on Telegam. For reports on Economics, Current Affairs and more, subscribe this blog on Telegam.
You may also like to Read:
There is NO "National Flower" for India
June Retail Inflation at 8 Month High
Political Crisis in Karnataka | Key Events Occurred so far
Comments
Post a Comment