Medical negligence can have devastating consequences, and often, patients and their families are left in the dark about what went wrong. The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, empowers citizens to seek information from public authorities. This article delves into an RTI case where an applicant sought details about alleged medical negligence, shedding light on what kind of information can be obtained and what limitations exist.
Background: What Information Was Sought
In this case, an appellant filed an RTI application with the Delhi Police. The core of the application revolved around allegations of medical negligence against two private hospitals, Kalra Hospital and Bhagat Hospital. The applicant raised several queries concerning the alleged wrong diagnosis of a lady patient and also sought information on the action taken police on a complaint filed with the SHO of Kalra Hospital and Bhagat Hospital. Essentially, the applicant wanted to understand the findings of any official inquiries into the medical treatment provided and any police action taken.
How the Public Authority Responded
The Public Information Officer (PIO) of the Delhi Police responded that many of the queries raised appellant did not fall within the definition of “information” as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. The PIO clarified that after an inquiry, the complaints had been recommended for closure, as no police action was deemed warranted. The appellant was then informed that a copy of the inquiry report could be obtained upon payment of the requisite fee. This response indicated a partial refusal to provide detailed explanations, citing the scope of the RTI Act.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
The matter escalated to the Central Information Commission (CIC) when the appellant pursued the matter further. During the hearing, the respondent (Delhi Police) presented additional information. They submitted that the Delhi Medical Council (DMC), which is the designated authority for handling cases of medical negligence, had also conducted its own assessment. The DMC had found that, prima facie, no case of medical negligence was made out in the treatment administered to the patient at both Bhagat Hospital and Kalra Hospital. This submission from the respondent highlighted that other statutory bodies had also reviewed the case and reached a conclusion.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The CIC, after considering the submissions from both sides, delivered its decision. The Commission observed that under the RTI Act, only information as per the existing records could be provided. It rejected the appeal, stating that the queries in the RTI application were essentially seeking reasons and explanations from the respondent. The CIC reiterated that such requests for subjective interpretations or justifications do not fall within the ambit of “information” as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. This decision is significant because it clarifies the boundaries of what can be accessed through RTI when dealing with complex issues like medical negligence. While factual records and inquiry reports can be sought, the RTI Act is not a tool to compel public authorities to provide opinions, justifications, or reasons for their decisions that go beyond existing documentary evidence.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Understand the Definition of “Information”: The RTI Act defines “information” as any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advice, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, and data held in electronic form. It does not typically cover requests for reasons, justifications, or subjective interpretations of events.
- Lesson 2: Focus on Factual Records: When seeking information related to inquiries or complaints, focus your RTI queries on obtaining factual records, reports, and official documents. Avoid asking “why” a certain decision was made or for an explanation of someone’s reasoning. Instead, ask for the report that contains the reasoning.
- Lesson 3: Identify the Correct Forum: For specific types of grievances, like medical negligence, there are often specialized bodies (like the Delhi Medical Council in this case) that are better equipped to investigate and provide findings. While RTI can help you get information from these bodies, it’s not a substitute for their investigative processes.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Public Authority: Determine which public authority holds the information you need. In cases of police complaints, it would be the police department. For inquiries departments, identify that specific department.
- Draft Your RTI Application Carefully: Clearly state the information you are seeking. Be specific and focus on requesting records, reports, or documents.
- Mention Relevant Dates and Details: Include dates of complaints, names of officials involved (if known), and any other identifying details that will help the PIO locate the information.
- Pay the Application Fee: Attach the prescribed fee (usually ₹10 in Indian Rupees) with your application, typically through a demand draft or IPO payable to the Accounts Officer of the concerned public authority.
Sample RTI question you can use:
“Please provide a copy of the inquiry report, if any, conducted police department regarding the complaint dated [Date] concerning alleged medical negligence at [Hospital Name], filed by [Your Name].”
Conclusion
This case underscores that while the RTI Act is a powerful tool for transparency, it has its limitations. Citizens can effectively use RTI to obtain factual records and official documents related to inquiries into matters like medical negligence. However, the Act is not designed to compel public authorities to provide subjective explanations or reasons that are not part of existing documented records. these nuances and framing RTI applications strategically, citizens can maximize their chances of obtaining useful information and holding public authorities accountable.
