Thanks to the Organisers of this Consultation for having invited me to speak on the proposed Bill on Right to Information. Prior to this I attended a similar Consultation held at Bhubaneswar by CARE, Orissa. I myself am also in some way interested in the topic. What I would say may not be all palatable to you. Let me tell you about my credentials. One of the several expertises that I had was on 'red tape'. Therefore my first advice would be, 'Please do not traverse that path ( path of red tape ), if you want to succeed. You shall never be able to clear that maze, which has been created by the bureaucracy.' Because in India bureaucracy preceded democracy, and therefore also bureaucracy is stronger than democracy.
My young friends from CHRI were referring to the fees and other provisions etc. If you go by that path, you shall soon be thrown out. My point is, why should you not say, 'no fees' or 'all fees are exempted' Why such provisions have been made? Because all of them ( BJP, BJD, Trinmul etc. ) are afraid of us, the people. They shall primarily take advantage of these provisions, and the latter shall benefit only their segment of population, not the people as a whole. I would have been happy, if you talk about what shout be done at Block level, Tahsil level, or for that matter at level of what is known as the cutting edge of administration.
For example, I am a small farmer and have purchased a piece of land from you. I go to a Tahsil, where 10,000 mutation cases are pending. What is my remedy?
As you know, of late there has been some soul searching on the issue of Right to Information. If not minutely, I have been watching the Government's move on Right to Information somewhat closely. My overall impression is that, the discussions held hitherto around the topic Right to Information veered round the questions, how it shall increase efficiency, how it shall lead to transparency in administration and how it shall develop the fourth pillar of the State and so on. Very rarely have these discussions touched the problems of people. We as Sikhandi of Mahabharat pay respect to these sermons. Otherwise we would achieve nothing.
Now I am outside the system and belong to no body. I appeal to all of you to bear in mind that segment of population, called the villagers while discussing Right to Information.
I won't go to the theoretical aspects of the issue. Right to Information, we have been told, paves the way for participation in decision making possess, since decision can be likened to an information processing system. It widens choice, and choice as you know assumes wider connotation after the publication of Mr.Amartya Sen's dissertation. Choice initiates cognitive devaluative transformation. It closes the gap between the planner, implementing agency and people. In nutshell it encourages orthogenetic growth and endogenous creativity, the very buzz words with which we are all familiar. But my point is not this.
I shall begin my analysis with a negative note, because I am very much afraid, the present Bill or the other Bill, as referred to by my enthusiastic young friends from CHRI, New Delhi will not be able to fulfill the objectives we intend to achieve. Because I shall quote Marx, whom you might have forgotten. He said, in our system, the knowledge is split up into as many levels as there are the number of hierarchies. This understanding led Marx further to observe that bureaucracy turns knowledge into secrecy and competence into mystery and it prevents greater profanation of the State (meaning secularization of the State). It is this Gordian knot that you have to break, if you want to achieve the real objective of the Bill.
I will now make a few general comments. Let me talk of man, the X man, the amorphous, nameless man, the people or citizen, how he or she shall get the information he wants. I am not worried about the people like you and me, living in Cuttack or Bhubaneswar, who can approach any higher officer or a court of law or catch hold of a politician to find a remedy for any of our problems. I am talking of the man who is living in a village.
Since Basundhara is primarily working on the affairs of women, I shall read a list of scheme relating to women, and ask you the question, how can a common and ordinary woman living in an interior village can get information about these schemes.
Prevention of Dowry or Dowry Prohibition Act
State Commission for Women acting as a Civil Court,
The State Social Welfare Advisory Board
Mahila Samittes in Rural Areas,
Rehabilitation of the Distressed Women
Short-stay Homes in 26 places
Working Women's Hostel (15 working and 15 under construction)
Education of Adult Women, (20 in rural areas and 6 in Urban areas)
Vocational Training Programmes 20 (12 in rural and 8 in urban areas)
Training and Extension for Women in Agriculture ( TEWA)- DANIDA assisted Project in 4 Districts
Voluntary Action Bureau and Family Counseling Centres,
Awareness Generation Programme for Rural and Poor Women
State Old age Pension
National Old Age Pension
Mission Shakti (Women Self Help Groups)
Mahila Vikash Samabaya Nigam with 195 affiliated Societies
Economic Programmes
Scheme for Support, Training and Employment of Women ( STEP)
Rastriya Mahila Kosha
Indira Mahila Yozana
Social Sensitization Programmes
Allied Infrastructural Activities ( Fast Food etc. )
ICDS ( 281 Projects in 269 Blocks out of 314 )
DWCRA ( Development of Women and Children in Rural Areas ) and etc.
Suppose there is a lady in a village X. She might have read upto Matriculation or is totally illiterate. Does the law provide where and to whom this woman shall go, and where from she shall come to know the facilities available under these multifarious schemes. Each scheme has a separate functionary, a separate territorial area and a set of separate facilities. How can a woman access the facilities under a particular scheme, say for instance, the ICDS? The scheme itself does not mean anything. These are made only for public consumption. They might benefit marginally certain groups. My point is, where shall a lady, who is a graduate or undergraduate, or even illiterate, and who has some capacity or skill and wants to develop herself, go? Are the informations relating to these multifarious schemes available to her? If not, how these informations shall percolate to her?
Again I am having here a list of all the schemes covered by various Departments of the State Govt including the Schemes relating to Poverty Alleviation Programmes and those relating to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and so on and so forth. When one reads these schemes, the picture of the country that appears before us is that of a glorious, beautiful and prosperous country.
But the real facts are just the opposite. Because I don't have any information. If, for instance, I am a man of schedule tribe, do I know whether I belong to a Scheduled area or a non-Scheduled area? In case of a non-scheduled area, where shall I go to avail a scheme?
The Right to Information Bill should help me know where shall I go. But the Bill says, this is to be notified in the Gazette. As far as I know, nobody, not even a Government Officer reads the Gazette. It is read, if necessary, only by a few Government Officers and a few advocates and a few others, who are otherwise compelled to go through it.
My suggestion is that the information relating to Competent Authorities should be available locally at District head quarters, Block head quarters, Panchayat Offices, and Offices of Revenue Inspectors, which are otherwise known as cutting edges of administration. Otherwise howsoever furious debate over this or that provision of the Bill your may make here, the Bill is going to achieve nothing.
Then what's the way? There is a simple way. The Departments or combination of Departments of Government may prepare their Websites, to be made available at sub-divisional headquarters wherefrom the information shall percolate to the lower levels. There is no other means by which the Government organizations can disseminate such information.
Several other alternatives have been proposed like notification in the official Gazette. But it shall take any length of time and bear no result in the end.
The Section 11 of the Draft Bill says that it shall override the provisions of other State Acts. It is silent on the Central acts. I believe, given such a formulation, the entire purpose of the Draft Bill shall be defeated. Section 3 of the Evidence Act defines "what is document". Then again its Section 74 says, 'what is a public document'. Then Section 124 of the Evidence Act prohibits disclosure of information, where public interest would suffer. The proposed Draft Bill has not taken into account all these existing laws and provisions. In such a situation, there is every possibility that the provisions of the State Act and that of the Central Acts might interfere with each other, or even be repugnant to each other.My point is, you should reconcile these provisions of Central Acts with that of the proposed State Act.
My next submission is about the duration within which the information is to be supplied. In the State Bill, it stretches from 48 hours to 45 days. My humble appeal with folded hands to you is that, please don't go in for litigation. Let's not create a new species of litigation, with which we (bureaucrats) are familiar, not they (common people). If you lodge a complain and make a case for not getting an information, the concerned officer shall be happy, because he knows that the litigation so created might take five years, ten years or even more, and nothing would happen and he would get some breathing time. So, my advice is, please avoid the course of litigation as far as possible.
My next point is, why is Lok Pal invoked? No doubt Lok Pal is there to deal with corruption and big things. But Lokpal can't bear the substantive burden of the people's Right to Information. Every body has a constitutional right to approach Lokpal. But if you go to Lok Pal with your complain on Right to Information, I am sure, nothing shall happen. A common man, say a marginal or small farmer, is faced with innumerable problems and there are hundreds of schemes. One scheme provides 25% of subsidy, another 35%, and still another 100%. How can he avail these schemes by the present provisions of the Draft Bill? I am sure, he is not going to get the benefit of any of these schemes.My humble submission is therefore that the entire procedure of appeal has to be very summery.
The other alternative proposed is the Departmental proceedings, which is of course an euphemism for nothing to happen. When I was in the Department, 30% of the cadre were under departmental proceedings at one stage. The whole exercise resulted in a disaster. Why should we now invite that proven disaster into the arena of Right to Information?
Let me tell you something about the Orissa Relief Code, which is a big volume of 300 to 400 pages. If you try to understand, it would be equivalent to an M.PHIL Course. My daughter was entrusted by her Guide with this subject. But it was so difficult that she thought of abandoning the course in the middle, because getting the list was itself a formidable task. But let me tell you that the Relief Code is not mandatory. The first page of the Relief Code says that it is an executive instruction. As you know, the executive instruction changes when a new instruction is signed and issued. But when the Super Cyclone came about 3 years back, we heard the pronouncements on the infallibility and immutability of the Relief Code. It was for nothing, but to hoodwink every body and to conceal our inaction.
I would now draw your kind attention to the Sections 217 and 167 of the Indian Penal Code, i.e. about the penalty for furnishing false information by a public servant under certain circumstances. Bypassing these existing provisions, if you create new provisions under a new Act, the problems shall further be compounded.
It often happens that if a public servant is charged with an offence under some Sections of a law, he shall take shelter under some other Sections of another law to escape punishment. In the process nothing happens.
The present Bill on Right to Information, if enacted at all, does not render inoperative the existing codes and manuals of the Government of Orissa. The Orissa Records Manual, which is applicable to all the Heads of the Departments, provides elaborate rules on supply of information, beginning from paragraph 333 to 430. There is another manual called Nizarat Manual which provides similar rules for Revenue cases. Than there is another obsolete Book called Practice and Procedure Manual. Again there are other departmental manuals. All these Manuals are not going to be inoperative, with the enactment of Right to Information. We must have very valid reason as to why the public servants, supposed to abide by these manuals, won't do a thing in time and why they would delay in giving information.
We must realize and should not forget that bureaucracy is a severe limiting factor in development. This is what all latest development theorists are agreed upon all over the world including India. Somebody referred to the re-organisation of the administration to select very good officers. But the Administrative Reforms Commission in 1964 had given a recommendation to pick up very good officers, and for that reason, suggested that the officers who had completed 12 years of service, should undergo a competitive examination. It was nearly 40 years back that this recommendation was made. Why was it not done? Because it did not suit us, the bureaucrats.
Then about the 73rd Amendment of the Constitution. Why nothing is happening? Because it speaks of Gram Sabha, which is equivalent by definition to Gram Shasan of Orissa Gram Panchayat Act and Gram Panchayat Samiti Act. Unless you amend the latter, the two definitions may mean the same thing, and nothing will happen. Initially we shall be stuck up.
Now about inefficiency of Police. I attended one Seminar on Police-Magistracy controversy, which is a 141 year old controversy, still going on. In 1861 the Police Act was framed, which laid down the different duties of District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police. The controversy regarding what the Collector would do and what SP would has not been settled even after lapse of 141 years. This is notwithstanding the fact that several Police Commissions and Committees have made very conclusive recommendations on this.
Similarly about the prison reforms. All our leaders had undergone imprisonment before we attained independence. Soon after independence, the leaders of the country therefore wanted prison reform at first instance. But as you would find, no substantial reform was done. That's why we again find to-day the slogan 'prison reform'. Why? Because there is no feedback anywhere.
We only frame our views from newspapers. We don't go and see a prison ourselves. There is no integrated approach anywhere.
So my humble appeal is that you should not fall on the beaten track. It is told that several States have legislated Right to Information. Yes. But they have also fallen on the beaten track. I know, nothing will happen. We people belong to Cuttack, Bhubaneswar or Puri. We can afford to spend our time after litigations. But remember the case of that common man, and think whether the proposed legislation is going to help him.