Right2Information

Right to Information – Master key to good governance

First removal of obnoxious alteration made in the definition of information in DOPT website!

Posted by rtiact2005 on July 27, 2006

BETTER NAME CLASS OF DOCUMENTS TO BE NOT DISCLOSED. 

The Government can show its sincerity, in clarifying that only a small 
portion of file notings would be exempted from disclosure, such as 
subjects under sub-Section (1) of Section 8 of the Act and some more. These 
primarily would concern affairs of States. What has been of major 
concern is the manner in which the Department of Personnel and Training has 
excluded all type of notings, as a blanket, and ignored all 
representations, including decisions of the Chief Information Commission, from 
January to July 2006. In fitness of things, THE FIRST STEP which is 
required of the Government, to give confidence to citizens, that nothing 
unfair and unreasonable shall be done, would be to forthwith order removal 
of the obnoxious alteration made in the definition of ˜information’ 
under sec.2(f) of the Act, displayed on the websites: Persmin and RTI 
Portal. 

Let the method adopted be to not enlist some selected areas in which 
file notings shall be allowed to be disclosed, but areas in which file 
notings shall not be disclosed. Matters listed in Sec.8(1) (a) to (j) 
would be handy to start with, being affairs of State. Let it not be 
overlooked that for decades, Courts have examined documents on which the 
Governments claimed privilege, under sec.123 of Evidence Act and/or under 
Art 74(2) of the Constitution, and generally allowed the privilege, 
except in case of routine matters where it was either not shown, or it was 
not possible to show, prejudice to State if the document is disclosed. 
The situation should appear to improve with promulgation of the RTI 
Act, rather than become worse from what it was before the 2005 Act. In 
short: ‘BE POSITIVE’.

P.K Aditya, Chandigarh.

One Response to “First removal of obnoxious alteration made in the definition of information in DOPT website!”

  1. Dhirendra Krishna said

    DOPT is not authorised to give their interpretation, until RTI Act is ammended by the Parliament.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: