Before I discuss Clause 3and 4, I would like to make some general comments. When we make an Act to realize some objectives, we should first ascertain whether there is a suitable environment for its implementation or not. Otherwise it, the new Act shall remain defunct, as has been the case with, for instance, the Dowry Prohibition Act.

In order that the Right to Information legislation can succeed, first of all, there should be some basic, minimum level of accountability and transparency on the part of public authorities. Then the Act itself in its provisions should be people-friendly. The Act should put a time limit on the disposal of a matter by the public authorities. But as we see a project which should be completed in five years takes ten years, and the expenditure of a project which is estimated at Rs.5 crores gets escalated to even Rs.100 crores in absence of observance of any time limit.

As regards the need for information-sharing, the attitude of public servants for this is grossly negative. To cover up their attitude for secrecy, they take shelter under the Official Secrets Act. England and some of other Commonwealth countries have abolished the Official Secrets Act, whereas we in India still cling on to it. As regards the media, they have got their own standard of judging the worth of what to communicate and what not to, which has least correspondence with public interest as such.

As regards the need for less governance, we are having too much of governance. In a small Block or Tahsil, one comes across too many Inspectors and Supervisors for a particular scheme, the net result being nothing. Again we find the government controlling so many industries, each running on loss. The pyramidal structure of administration still exists, where everything moves from top to bottom and then from bottom to top, killing a lot of time in the process. In such a situation, the proposed RTI Act shall have a little chance to succeed.

Then again, how can there be good administration when the people having experience of so many years in the administration are being asked to retire. How can we get efficiency in works, when the efficient people themselves are given good-bye to. Under the circumstances, if we want the law on Right to Information to be made and implemented, we should first ensure a proper environment, keeping in view the above mentioned phenomena.

Now coming to Clause 3 and 4, I would say that unless our public offices get computerized, how can a common man take the information through a floppy or a disk? Again the kind of clerical staff with a Badababu ( Head clerk) at their head, that we are having at present, shall not be able to cope with the enormous demand for information that is likely to be generated from the members of public after the Right To Information Act is enforced. So my suggestion would be to set up a separate cell in every office to receive the request for information and to dispose them of. There are many more, complicated problems likely to arise in due course, once the Act is put into operation. These problems need be proactively addressed, so that the Act shall have a chance of smooth operationalization.