“I was fighting for almost a decade with the Corporation authorities to get information from the birth/death certificate section in order to get my passport….There was no response to my requests in the past. But, thanks to the RTI (Right to Information) Act, the officials have given me the details with photocopies…”
This was the statement from a happy Narayanapuram resident who has obtained his passport and is waiting to go abroad.
Like him, there are many more taking the RTI route to get credible information from public sector banks and the government departments such as revenue, judiciary, prisons, police and transport.
However, all is not easy for these applicants to ferret the information.
RTI applicants feel lack of intervention and absence of follow-up by the higher-ups to their queries have resulted in the RTI Act losing its sting. “We expect the top officials in charge of the implementation of the RTI Act in government departments to be pro-active. Penal provisions should be quoted in the correspondence of superiors in the case of delays,” F. Mohammed Jaminudeen, a whistle-blower said.
Basic aim
The basic objective of the RTI Act is to empower the citizens, bring transparency and accountability. “However, some officials give an impression to the public that they cannot get information under any circumstances. This kind of an attitude should go,” said S. Sampath, an RTI activist and a trade union office-bearer in a State transport undertaking.
According to the RTI Act, public sector undertakings and government departments are mandatorily obligated to furnish details to applicants seeking information on nominal payment by affixing stamps, except for a few wings such as Defence Ministry, where the public interest is paramount as certain information cannot be revealed.
The officer designated in every government office is known as Public Information Officer (PIO). For instance, in Madurai Corporation, the Assistant Commissioners are PIOs. The Commissioner is the First Appellate Authority and the CIC (Commissioner, Information Commissionerate) is the higher appellate authority. Similarly, in the police department, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Madurai City (Headquarters), is the PIO. Public seeking information should get response within 30 days. If not, the officer is liable to be punished under the RTI Act and the appellate authority shall pass orders.
However, many whistleblowers claim that the RTI Act is violated by some officials who are bent upon not giving correct information. According to Mr. Jaminudeen, he asked for a detail from Madurai Corporation on April 4 this year and he should have got a reply by May 4. But, only a fortnight ago, he received the reply. The higher-ups should take note of this and punish the officials responsible for the delay, he said.
Not many keen
Not many staff in the prisons and judiciary seem to be keen in disseminating information to applicants under the RTI Act, said M. Humayun Kabir, a representative of a non-governmental organisation (NGO) and an activist, who has assisted many through the RTI route.
According to Mr. Kabir, the prison authorities adopted dilly-dallying tactics. “Whenever, we asked information about the death of remand prisoners, the stock reply was “death was natural,” or “the case was under investigation.”
There was no detailed information. Be it a 70-year old remand prisoner or a 27-year old youth, the reasons for the death was the same. However, after intervention from higher-ups in the Prisons Department, the officials are now responding in Madurai,” he said but alleged that it was not the case with officials in Coimbatore and Salem prisons.
