Information Gap

• Most information commissioners are ex-bureaucrats
  
• Two ex-secretaries of the ministry of personnel, which oversees implementation of RTI, have appointed themselves as commissioners soon after retirement
  
• There have been no criteria laid down for the pattern of work allocation of commissioners
  
• In nearly four years, only 150 penalties imposed on erring babus, totalling Rs 22.79 lakh.

  "They arrested me when I sought the information. If I pursue it, something worse might happen...."

  Only Rs 7 lakh actually recovered so far.
  
• RTI applicants intimidated, even thrown into jail on trumped-up charges

***

In 2005, the still new UPA government brought in the Right to Information Act (RTI), giving hope to millions of citizens seeking transparency and accountability in governance. But nearly four years later, the implementation of RTI continues to flounder, as applicants are turned away, harassed, sometimes even thrown into jail on flimsy charges. Their crime: seeking information that would expose the systemic corruption in several development schemes. Today, it seems, in many cases information comes at a terrible price.

And it's happening across the country. Ironically, while applicants bear the brunt of the state's displeasure on being asked uncomfortable questions, those implementing RTI have proved to be largely ineffective in booking the bureaucracy. The law draws teeth from its Section 20 that mandates information commissioners to not only impose penalties on officials who refuse to give information, but also recommend departmental action against them.

Unfortunately, as details accessed by Outlook under the RTI show, information commissioners at the apex Central Information Commission (CIC) in Delhi have been more than indulgent towards babus who refused to part with information.

"It's unethical for someone who deals with the post to appoint himself as information czar after retiring."

Of the nearly 6,400 cases nationwide that could have attracted a penalty, the CIC has imposed fines in just 150-odd cases in the last four years.

Since 2005, the CIC has imposed penalties on the bureaucracy worth Rs 23.79 lakh. Of this too, it has managed to recover just a paltry Rs 7.6 lakh. With few penalties imposed, bureaucrats and those in the state administrations continue to deny information with impunity, ensuring that the RTI is left toothless.

Of the states, Bihar seems to be vying for the worst case scenario award. Take the case of Birendra Kumar Sah from Chapra. He had applied for a teacher's post but was rejected since he refused to pay bribes to the village authorities. He then turned to the RTI, seeking details (on July 10, 2007) of the appointment of teachers in the local village school. After the mandatory 30 days (by when a response is expected), not only was Sah denied information, he was charged with the murder of the village headman's wife on August 19. The local administration connived to charge him, but they overlooked a crucial detail—Sah was born with 80 per cent disability and is wheelchair-bound. The authorities had charged him with attacking the headman's house and murdering his wife, uncle and security guard. Sah's well-wishers shifted him to another village where he attended an RTI awareness camp being run by an NGO, the Bihar RTI Manch. The NGO took up his case and forced the administration to back down and withdraw the charges.

Sah's case is no isolated miscarriage. Satyendra Narain Dev, an activist from the Kajahuli taluka in Madhubani district, had to goto jail for four months. "I had sought details of allocation of houses under the Indira Awas Yojana for below poverty line families. A day before the information was due, the authorities slapped a case of extortion and intimidation of a government official on me." Dev continued to petition senior police authorities for months but his luck ran out in September '07 when he was sent to jail.

Out on bail, Dev finally met chief minister Nitish Kumar in April last year. "He assured me he would look into the matter...and even promised to withdraw the case. It has been ten months since then and I have not heard from the authorities." Ironically, Dev did manage to get the information he had sought. "Their reply under the RTI confirmed my suspicions that houses and money had been fraudulently awarded." So were the officials guilty of giving out illegal allotments investigated and booked? Dev doesn't know and he doesn't care, he's lost his appetite to take on the system: "They arrested me when I sought the information. If I pursue it, something worse will happen," he says.


Caged in: Satyendra Dev of Kajahuli at his residence

Like Sah and Dev, Shiv Prasad Rai from Buxar went to jail for 29 days on the orders of the same district magistrate he had asked questions to. Rai had sought details of the status of loans disbursed from 60 nationalised banks in the district under the various schemes for farmers. After the authorities failed to comply with the 30-day deadline, he appealed to the first and second appellate authorities and the state information commission finally passed an order penalising the DM. "I was called to his office and asked to sign eight pages stating that I was satisfied with the information provided on February 1, 2008. But the state information commission had already imposed a penalty on the DM so I refused to sign his papers. They immediately slapped cases against me on the same day alleging extortion."

Rai was arrested and placed in judicial custody but he continued with his inquiries and unearthed bogus recipients of loans meant for farmers. Despite a stint in jail, Rai has refused to give up and continues his investigations.

Tracking these cases of harassment is social activist Praveen Amanullah, who, incidentally, is also married to the state's home secretary. She is also the convenor of the Bihar RTI Manch which organises RTI campaigns every two months. "The state has done little to create awareness on RTI and even voluntary disclosures under section four of the RTI act have not been done," she says. She also got a taste of bureaucratic apathy when the Patna Medical College refused to provide information on the care and quality of treatment given to patients. "They did not respond...simply assured us that improvements would be made."

Chief information commissioner Wajahat Habibullah expresses his inability to deal with cases of harassment of applicants by public authorities (see interview). "The state commissions can only ensure that the information is given to the applicant according to the provisions of the RTI Act. But our hands are tied as far as harassment goes because it is up to the state to provide relief."

Perhaps a key reason for the low number of penalties is the fact that the majority of information commissioners are former bureaucrats who view the commission as a post-retirement benefit. Bihar is no exception to the trend. CIC Habibullah himself was secretary for consumer affairs and panchayati raj before being picked for the top job. His room, adorned by pictures of the Nehru-Gandhi family, might raise eyebrows on why and how he was chosen. To be fair, Habibullah has also received accolades for steering the commission and pushing the boundaries to ensure greater transparency.

Consider also A.N. Tiwari, who was secretary, ministry of personnel and public grievance, in whose time the RTI Act was passed by Parliament. While activists allege that he was personally opposed to the Act, Tiwari quickly ensured that he was appointed as an information commissioner, which, incidentally, was facilitated by the same ministry the day he retired. One of his successors, Satyanand Mishra, also became an information commissioner after he retired as secretary of the same ministry.

Shekhar Singh, convenor of the national people's right to information campaign, says, "Our stand is that the appointment of information commissioners has to be transparent. It is unethical when someone who deals with the appointment appoints himself as an information commissioner on retirement."

As cases continue to pile up at the CIC, there seems to be little or no logic to the work being allocated to each commissioner. In the absence of any clear guidelines, Habibullah seems to have arbitrarily allocated work to his fellow commissioners. A series of file notings on the allocation of work—inspected by Outlook under the RTI—bears testimony to this fact. With bureaucrats sitting in judgement of fellow bureaucrats, the RTI has strangely now morphed into a bailout mechanism for corrupt bureaucrats.

---

By Saikat Datta And Anuradha Raman