Many Indian citizens use the Right to Information (RTI) Act to get information from government bodies. Sometimes, the information sought involves sensitive communications between different agencies. This case highlights whether correspondence between SEBI and CBI can be accessed under RTI, especially when it relates to a significant scam. Understanding this can empower you to seek similar information if you believe it’s in the larger public interest.
Background: What Information Was Sought
An RTI applicant, referring to a news report about a major IPO/shares scam in Gujarat and Maharashtra published in 2006, filed an application with the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI). He wanted to know about the investigations conducted SEBI and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into this scam. The SEBI’s Public Information Officer (PIO) refused to provide the correspondence between SEBI and CBI, citing Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, which deals with commercial confidence and trade secrets. For other information, the PIO directed the applicant to check the SEBI website for orders against entities violating securities laws.
How the Public Authority Responded
The PIO’s response was twofold. Firstly, the correspondence with the CBI was denied Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act. Secondly, for the information related to investigations and orders, the applicant was asked to visit the SEBI website and find the relevant details himself. This approach essentially shifted the burden of finding the information from the PIO to the applicant, without a clear indication of whether the requested information was readily available or how to locate it.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
The matter reached the Central Information Commission (CIC). The CIC noted a critical flaw in the PIO’s response: the PIO had not claimed that the information did not exist. Instead, the PIO had placed the responsibility of searching for the information entirely on the applicant. The Commission understood that the applicant was pointing towards serious violations of securities laws. Therefore, the PIO should have made an effort to identify specific cases related to the reported violations and provided the relevant details, rather than simply telling the applicant to browse the website.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The CIC directed the PIO of SEBI to thoroughly check their records. They were asked to provide the applicant with details of investigations undertaken concerning alleged violations entities related to IPOs and shares in Gujarat and Maharashtra around the time of the reported scam. The Commission clarified that the PIO should only provide information that they could locate themselves, as the applicant had provided a general reference to a news item and no specific case details. This order emphasizes that PIOs have a duty to assist applicants in obtaining information, especially when a larger public interest is involved, and cannot simply pass the buck.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Be Specific When Possible: While the applicant in this case referred to a news item, providing more specific details about the scam or the entities involved, if known, can help the PIO locate the information more easily.
- Lesson 2: Understand Section 8 Exemptions: The PIO invoked Section 8(1)(d). It’s important to understand that certain types of information, like commercial confidence, are exempt from disclosure unless a larger public interest warrants it. However, the authorities must demonstrate how disclosure would cause harm.
- Lesson 3: PIO’s Duty to Assist: The CIC’s decision reinforces that PIOs have a responsibility to actively search for and provide information. They cannot simply ask you to comb through websites or public records without making a reasonable effort themselves. If information is denied, the PIO must provide valid reasons.
- Lesson 4: Public Interest Overrides Exemptions: Even if information falls under an exemption, if the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants its disclosure, it must be provided. This case hints at the possibility of disclosure if the public interest in knowing about a significant scam outweighs commercial confidentiality concerns.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Correct Public Authority: Determine which government department or agency holds the information you need. In this case, it was SEBI.
- Clearly State Your Request: Be as precise as possible in your application. Mention any relevant dates, events, or public documents (like news reports) that can help the PIO locate the information.
- Cite Relevant Sections (If Known): While not mandatory, if you know specific sections of the RTI Act that might be relevant, you can mention them.
- Be Prepared for Appeals: If your request is denied or you don’t receive a satisfactory response, remember you have the right to file a First Appeal and then a Second Appeal to the CIC.
Sample RTI question you can use:
“Please provide details of any investigations conducted department concerning alleged violations of securities laws related to IPOs/shares in the states of Gujarat and Maharashtra during the period [specify year, e.g., 2005-2007], based on reports or information available with your department. If any correspondence exists between your department and the CBI regarding these specific investigations, please provide details of such correspondence, unless exempted under Section 8 of the RTI Act, in which case, please provide the specific grounds for exemption and the larger public interest, if any, that warrants disclosure.”
Conclusion
This case serves as a crucial reminder that the RTI Act is a powerful tool for transparency and accountability. Even when dealing with potentially sensitive inter-agency communications, citizens have the right to seek information, especially when it pertains to issues of significant public concern like financial scams. The CIC’s intervention ensured that the PIO fulfilled their duty to assist the applicant, highlighting the importance of diligent information retrieval and the potential for disclosure when public interest demands it. Keep using RTI, stay informed, and hold the government accountable.
