Right To Information makes administrators accountable: New CIC
By Daiaphira Kharsati
SHILLONG: The Right to Information Act has given voice to an alert citizenry in their fight against corruption with over 100 per cent appeals as compared to 2006.
An RTI applicant can appeal before the First Appellate Authority if his application gets rejected by the public information officer. The second appeal can be made to the chief information commissioner of the state.
Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) PBO Warjri told The Shillong Times that an increasing number of urban citizens are filing RTI as compared to the rural populace.
“The Right to Information Act, 2005, seeks to give meaning for the exercise of freedom of speech and expression as envisaged in the Constitution. It is intended to enhance transparency in the functioning of public bodies. Once transparency is established in the system, it will act as a check on corruption,” he said.
Warjri stated that there has been a change as rural people are also coming forward though the number is much less when compared to urban people. “If a person is not satisfied with the reply, he/she can come to the Commission. The work of the Commission is to ensure that information is provided to the information seeker,” he added.
It is informed that rejection of RTI applications is very rare. However, there are delays on the part of the concerned department in providing the information sought for.
He noted that the act exempts certain intelligence and security organisations from its purview as envisaged in Section 24 that states, “Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the intelligence and security organisations specified in the Second Schedule, being organisations established by the Central Government or any information furnished by such organisations to that Government: Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section.”
Warjri added, “There is certain confidential information which cannot be disclosed. We need to respect the functioning of the system.”
For the country to be free from corruption, Warjri observed that citizens should be responsible and alert and critically observe the system of governance of the state and the country, as the RTI Act has empowered people to come forward to create accountability in the system of administration.
Meanwhile, RTI applicants speaking to this reporter said they mostly go for an RTI to address their personal grievances, which is what most people do. More and more people and jobseekers are using RTI to get copies of their answer scripts for public examinations. Media persons too use RTI to get answers to many queries which government officials would not readily provide.
In Meghalaya, the voluntary disclosure clause is not followed by most departments and RTI applications are often answered in a very technical manner especially when it concerns queries related to road and other projects.
It is learnt that many government officials are brazen and do not care much about the RTI disclosures. They see it as a one-day wonder in the media after which people forget. Moreover, an official or politician who is caught misusing public funds is hardly ever penalised.
It may be mentioned that one of the most prominent examples of misuse of public funds relates to the Rotary traffic island in Police Bazar constructed in 2005. RTI activists had found out that though the total cost of the project was shown as Rs 5.42 crore by the government, the actual amount spent was Rs 3.09 crore. But nothing happened to those who misused that public money.