The safety and security of RTI activists are crucial for a transparent democracy. When activists face harassment or worse, it’s natural for citizens to seek information about such incidents. This case highlights how the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, can be used to inquire about these serious matters and what to expect when you do. Understanding this process empowers you to seek accountability and information, even on sensitive issues.
Background: What Information Was Sought
In this instance, an RTI applicant approached the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) seeking crucial information regarding the harassment and even the tragic murders of several RTI activists. The applicant’s intention was to understand the extent of such incidents and potentially the government’s response or awareness. The PMO, recognizing that this information likely resided with another department, appropriately transferred the application to the Public Information Officer (PIO) of the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT).
How the Public Authority Responded
The PIO at the DoPT provided some information to the applicant. However, they denied access to other parts of the requested information. The reason cited for this denial was that the reports of harassment and assault on RTI activists were primarily based on newspaper and media coverage. The department claimed there was no definitive official status or clear information available on the specific cases of these harassed and assaulted RTI activists beyond what was reported in the media.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
When the applicant did not receive the complete information they sought, they escalated the matter to the Central Information Commission (CIC). During the hearing, the respondent (the DoPT) reiterated their position. They explained that the figures or information they had about the harassment of RTI activists were derived from media reports and not from any systematic factual survey conducted department. They further argued that the primary responsibility for investigating and taking appropriate action in such cases lay with the respective State Governments. Therefore, any specific details pertaining to a particular case of harassment or assault would need to be obtained directly from the State Government where the incident occurred.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The Central Information Commission (CIC), after hearing both sides, made a crucial observation. The CIC found that the information that was available with the DoPT and could be officially provided had already been furnished to the appellant. Regarding the information that was based solely on media reports and fell under the purview of State Governments, the CIC acknowledged the respondent’s submission. Consequently, the CIC decided to dispose of the appeal, implying that no further directions were necessary given the nature of the information and the jurisdiction involved. This decision underscores that while RTI is powerful, it is bound availability of information and departmental responsibilities.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Understand Jurisdictional Limits: Be aware that government departments have specific areas of responsibility. If the information you seek pertains to matters primarily handled Governments or local authorities, you may need to file your RTI application with them directly. The DoPT, for instance, may not maintain exhaustive records of all individual harassment cases across India.
- Lesson 2: Differentiate Between Official Records and Media Reports: Public authorities are generally obligated to provide information that exists in their official records. Information solely based on media reports, unless officially collated or verified, may be harder to obtain or may be provided with caveats, as seen in this case.
- Lesson 3: Be Prepared for Partial Information or Transfers: It is common for RTI applications to be transferred to the most appropriate department (Section 6(3) of the RTI Act). Also, expect that you might receive partial information if the authority does not hold all the data you requested or if certain information is exempted under the Act.
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 issues concerning the safety of citizens or specific incidents, this might involve the Ministry of Home Affairs, State Police departments, or the Department of Personnel & Training if it concerns government employees.
- Draft Your Application Clearly: State your request precisely. Use simple language and avoid ambiguity.
- Specify the Information Required: Clearly list what details you are seeking. For instance, instead of “information on harassment,” ask for “details of reported incidents of harassment against RTI activists in the last five years.”
- Pay the Application Fee and Submit: Follow the prescribed procedure for submitting your RTI application and paying the nominal fee.
Sample RTI question you can use:
Provide details of any official reports or documented cases of harassment or assault against individuals identified as RTI activists that are held department/office within the last [Number] years. If such information is not directly held, please state the name and address of the department/office that is likely to hold this information.
Conclusion
This case serves as a valuable reminder that the RTI Act is a powerful tool for seeking information, but it operates within the framework of existing government structures and information availability. While you may not always get every piece of data, especially if it’s not officially documented or falls under another jurisdiction, persistence and a clear understanding of the RTI process can still lead to valuable insights and help uphold accountability. Continue to use your right to information to foster a more transparent and responsive governance system.
