Understanding your right to information is crucial for every Indian citizen. This case highlights how the RTI Act can be used to seek clarity on matters involving public figures and official delegations, even when initially met with resistance. It empowers citizens to get information that might otherwise remain hidden, ensuring transparency in governance.
Background: What Information Was Sought
In this case, an RTI applicant filed four separate applications with the President’s Secretariat. The applicant was seeking various pieces of information on different subjects. While the Public Information Officer (PIO) did provide some of the requested information, the applicant felt that certain specific details were withheld without proper justification.
How the Public Authority Responded
The initial response from the PIO was partial. Some information was disclosed, but the applicant’s specific concerns about certain withheld details remained unaddressed. This led the applicant to escalate the matter further, eventually bringing it before the Central Information Commission (CIC) for a decision.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
During the hearing at the CIC, the applicant presented their case, emphasizing that specific pieces of information had not been provided. They argued that the reasons given for withholding this information were not convincing or adequate. The PIO, representing the President’s Secretariat, had to justify their stance on the withheld information before the Commission.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The Central Information Commission, after hearing both sides, issued a directive to the PIO. The order was comprehensive and aimed at ensuring that the applicant received the information they were entitled to under the RTI Act. Key directions included:
- Disclosure of Dr. Subramanyam Swamy’s Letter: The PIO was directed to provide a copy of the letter written . Subramanyam Swamy to the then President concerning the formation of the Council of Ministers. This was to be done after consulting Section 11 of the RTI Act, if the PIO deemed it necessary to seek third-party consultation.
- Transfer of Queries on Accommodation: Regarding queries about the accommodation provided to the then President in Pune after demitting office, the PIO was instructed to transfer the remaining queries to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), as they were likely the authority holding that specific information.
- Information on News Item and Action: The PIO was directed to provide all available information, including file notings, pertaining to the cognizance taken then President or the President’s Secretariat of a particular news item and any action taken as a result.
- Invitation from Seychelles President: Concerning the invitation received from the President of Seychelles, the PIO was ordered to provide a copy if it was available in material form. If the PIO had previously claimed it was with another department (CCB) and thus not disclosable, the CIC mandated that the PIO must write to the appellant again. They were to either provide the copy of the invitation or, if denying it, issue a well-reasoned “speaking order” citing the specific exemption provision under the RTI Act that justified the denial.
- Delegation Family Members: Crucially, the CIC directed the PIO to provide the names of those members of the delegation during the visit who were family members of the President. This addressed the applicant’s specific request for personal details within an official context.
This order is significant because it underscores the principle that even information related to high offices can be sought under RTI, provided it does not fall under specific exemptions. It also emphasizes the PIO’s duty to provide comprehensive responses and, if denying information, to do so with proper justification.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Be Specific in Your Request: Clearly articulate the exact information you are seeking. Vague requests are more likely to be denied or misunderstood. In this case, the applicant was clear about the specific types of information they wanted.
- Lesson 2: Understand PIO’s Duty to Respond: The PIO has a statutory duty to provide information or a reasoned refusal. If you are not satisfied with the response, the RTI Act provides avenues for appeal (First Appeal and Second Appeal to the CIC).
- Lesson 3: Know Your Exemptions: While the RTI Act is broad, certain information is exempt. However, the public authority must cite the specific section of the Act under which they are denying information. The CIC’s directive on the invitation from Seychelles highlights the importance of a “speaking order” for any denial.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Correct Public Authority: Determine which government department or office is most likely to hold the information you need. For matters related to the President’s Secretariat, that would be the appropriate starting point.
- Draft Your RTI Application: Clearly state your request in simple language. Be precise about the information you want.
- Pay the Application Fee: A nominal fee is usually required.
- Submit Your Application: Send your application to the Public Information Officer (PIO) of the concerned department. Keep a copy for your records and note the date of submission.
Sample RTI question you can use:
Please provide the names of any family members of the President who were part of the official delegation during the visit to [Country/Event, if known] on [Date/Period, if known]. If this information is not directly available, please state which department holds this information and the relevant section of the RTI Act under which it is being denied.
Conclusion
This case serves as a powerful reminder that the RTI Act is a tool for transparency and accountability for all citizens. Even when dealing with information concerning the highest offices, the law empowers you to seek clarity. Always remember to file your applications clearly, follow up on responses, and don’t hesitate to escalate if your right to information is not being respected. Your persistent pursuit of information contributes to a more informed and democratic India.
