The move to amend the RTI law is misconceived-It ain't broken

http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/it-ain%5Ct-broken/376679/

It ain't broken

The move to amend the RTI law is misconceived
Business Standard / New Delhi November 17, 2009, 0:11 IST

After strong protest from civil society organisations, the government
has admitted that it is considering amending the Right to Information
(RTI) Act. It has, however, assured activists that a transparent and
consultative process will be adopted before any action is taken, and
the amendments will not be persevered with if activist groups are able
to convince the government that they are either unnecessary or
counterproductive. These assurances notwithstanding, it is unfortunate
that the government should again be contemplating changing a law that
stands as one of the first UPA government's main achievements.

Those in favour of a change cite two reasons: to exclude vexatious and
frivolous applications, and to take out of the purview of the law file
notings of discussions and consultations through which decisions are
arrived at. Civil society organisations in turn have given a number of
reasons why they consider amending the Act a retrogressive step. Two
detailed studies, one of them at the behest of the government, have
identified what prevents the law from working any better. Some of
these are poor record management, lack of trained staff, and lack of
awareness on the part of (and harassment of) applicants.
Significantly, neither of the studies has identified vexatious and
frivolous applications as the culprit clogging things up — a problem
for which the existing law has a built-in safeguard. This position
has, in fact, been endorsed by the government's own information
commissioners, who do not see any reason for amending the law at this
stage.

The real bone of contention is file notings. Most ministers and
bureaucrats remain opposed to their inclusion. Activists have pointed
out that including them in the pale of the law has not brought the
functioning of the government to a standstill. On the other hand, many
officials have candidly admitted that opening up the deliberative
process of the government has strengthened the hands of honest and
sincere officials. Also, while the decisions of government are
eventually known, what matters (and the additionality that this law
enables) is knowing why particular decisions have been taken, on the
basis of what facts and on what advice from whom. If file notings are
taken away, only the official correspondence will be left under the
purview of the Act, making it an ineffectual instrument. For a country
that scores poorly in global surveys of corruption, and whose bane is
the poor delivery of public services, openness in official functioning
is of the highest importance. It is only by making the law work
properly that some key administrative ills can be addressed. In fact,
citizens are exercising this new right with such vigour that the
machinery to handle it is getting clogged. Attention, therefore,
should be focused on how to prevent the pipeline from getting jammed,
and not on neutering the Act.
-----------------------
@i$#w@ry@!