Workshop on ‘A year of implementation of RTI Act in Orissa and
Role of Orissa Soochana Commission’ held on 7th December 2006 at Bhubaneswar
Even after more than a year elapsed since the RTI Act 2005 was enforced on 12th of October 05 throughout the country, it suffered a tardy and haphazard implementation in Orissa.. Besides the State Information Commission which started functioning with effect from 20th Nov 05 exhibited also a conspicuous failure to remedy the situation. And further shocking was the fact that the mainstream public except a few civil society groups remained utterly confused and consequently indecisive about what to do in the face of such a depressing scenario.
In order to initiate a public debate on what ought to be the role of State Government and of the State Information Commission and what the civil society groups themselves should do to reverse the downslide, a one-day Workshop was held on 7th of Dec. 06 involving nearly 100 representatives from the cross sections of the State such as academia, media persons, NGO leaders, social activists and lawyers. Convened by Orissa Right to Food Campaign in collaboration with Dept. of Journalism and Mass Communication, the Workshop took place on 7th of December 2006 at PG Council Conference Hall, Utkal University, Bhubaneswar.
Among the eminent persons who joined in the Workshop were Sri Rajaram Satapathy from Times of India, Sri Panchanan Kanungo, Former Orissa Minister of State for Finance, Prof. Surya Narayan Mishra and Prof. Pradeep Sarkar of Vani Vihar Law College. Besides Prof. Santosh Tripathy presided over the deliberations of the day.
At the outset Prof. Surya Narayan Mishra of Dept of Journalism gave his welcome address and in course of it observed that he has ever remained involved with RTI campaign in the State right since its inception and the said campaign has done a commendable job in its effort to set right the faulty set of Orissa RTI Rules announced by the State Government. Then Prof. Mishra expressed his displeasure at the manner in which Orissa Soochana Commission has ever since been functioning. He further ventilated his apprehension that the OSIC and a coterie of State bureaucrats have hatched a serious conspiracy to render the RTI Act dysfunctional in the State by way of resorting to all sorts of objectionable means. Prof.Mishra in conclusion appealed to all the civil society groups to resist tooth and nail any sort of move that might come from any quarter to defeat the effective implementation of RTI Act in the State, and simultaneously called for a public review of the role that Orissa Soochana Commission has so far been playing, with a view to make its functioning transparent and accountable.
Following the welcome address by Prof. Mishra Sri Pradeep Pradhan, Convener of the Workshop presented briefly the milestones of the year long RTI campaign in the State as spearheaded by Orissa Right to Food Campaign. Among other things, Sri Pradhan highlighted the persistent advocacy work undertaken by the various civil society groups across the State to amend the Orissa RTI Rules, which is ultra vires the parent law and anti-people out and out. He also warned the participants about the instances of arbitrary and non-transparent style of functioning of Orissa Soochana Commission and about some faulty judgments delivered by them in the context of several complaints and appeals lodged by common, poor and BPL citizens. The presentation by Sri Pradhan was followed by brief talks by RTI activists who hailed from different parts of the State to share their experience with others.
Sri Ksahnu Ch. Majhi, Samuhik Marudi Pratikar Udyam, Baragarh.
Sri Majhi who works among the poor tribals and harijans in Gaisilat Block is a member of the network called SMPU Padampur which fights for the interest of such marginalized people in the drought prone district of Bargarh. He narrated a recent experience of how the common villagers were able to get back their PDS rice using Section 4 of the Act. There used to occur large-scale swindling of BPL rice by a well-entrenched nexus of vested interests over the years and the poor villagers were not in a position to do anything about it, though they were systematically deprived of their due. In this backdrop the activists of SMPU Network Padampur first visited the offices of concerned Gram Panchayats for inspection of records relating to distribution of PDS rice under Section-4 of RTI Act 2005. Since the Panchayat officials refused to cooperate, the activists then went to Block office at Gaisilat. As the Block officials themselves were involved in the misappropriation of PDS rice, the PIO of the Block refused to comply with the group’s request for inspection. Then the activists approached the Sub-Collector Padampur for getting the concerned files inspected by them. And the Sub-Collector assured to supply the requested information within seven days. From the information furnished subsequently by him, it was found that around 2695 quintals of rice meant for distribution among the BPL families in Gaisilat Block has been hijacked away by the nexus of dishonest Panchayat and Block officials and storage agents.
Getting this sensitive information, the people first gheraoed the Gaislet Block office in the month of April’06. In the negotiation that followed, the Sub-collector Padampur assured to provide the pending rice within two months. When the rice was not provided as per this assurance, a group of activists of the network met the Collector and demanded action against the culprits. The Collector also assured to take necessary action in the matter, but subsequently did nothing of the sort. Finding no solution through such negotiations, thousands of local people gheraoed again the Gaislet Block office on 16th October 06 demanding the recovery of misappropriated rice. As a result of this second ghearo, the Inspector Civil Supply Bargarh was suspended and a case was filed against the concerned Storage Agent. Then the administration took immediate steps to distribute the BPL rice among the people in the concerned Panchayats. The people in the area are now getting the BPL rice regularly. The Gaisilat experience has proved that the people en masse can inspect any record relating to a public scheme such as PDS under Section 4 of RTI Act and get any anomaly, if found in course of such inspection, redressed with the help of their organized agitation.
Sri Jagannath Panda, Deogarh Pressure Group.
Sri Panda narrated an incident of tragicomic nature that took place on 7th Feb. 06 at Pallahada in Anugul district, when the activists of DPG divided into a few groups had been to different offices under State Government seeking information relating to some Schemes under Section 4 of the Act. They visited offices like Block, Forest (Kendu Leaf), Tahsil and Thana. While the staff of other offices escaped cunningly from their duty to provide information, the staff of Block office locked up inside a room all the members of the visiting group and handed over them to the OIC of Pallahada Police Station alleging that the members of the group were Maoists and wanted to forcibly take away all the confidential information of the Block using the name of RTI Act. But when the OIC himself came and interviewed the activists in an effort to discover the truth, he realized that the RTI Act through its Section 4 has empowered the citizens to inspect the information covered under Section 4 in the office of any public authority instantly without having to make any application. Then the detained members were released from the Block office.
Following this episode the various groups, who were thus refused the access to information under Section 4 lodged separate complaints under Section 18 of the Act before OSIC praying for the appropriate action against the concerned public authorities for violating Section 4. But the Commission kept these complaints pending for several months and finally rejected them on 20th June 06 on the ground that the enforcement of Section 4 was exclusively the job of the Suchana Commission and the citizens had nothing to do with it. Strangely enough, the Commission didn’t call the complainants for a hearing, nor inform them about the rejection of their complaints. The activists came to know about such rejection from the website of the Commission at a much later date. This is the instance of how OSIC has misinterpreted the Section 4 of the Act and behaved arbitrarily against the interest of the citizen complainants taking the side of the govt officials, Sri Jagannath Panda concluded.
Sri Hrushikesh Baliarsingh, Under Secy-cum-PIO, Dept. of Agriculture, Orissa
He presented a case relating to the RTI Act that occurred in his department. An employee was suspended in the Dept. The concerned employee asked for the copy of the departmental proceedings against him under RTI Act. Then a discussion took place in the department whether such information shall be given to the applicant or not. In the meantime, this case was handed over to the vigilance directorate for holding an enquiry into the matter. As the case was pending with the vigilance, it was decided to get a clarification from the vigilance whether the requested information would be supplied or not. The PIO of the Department has since been waiting for the response from the vigilance directorate. In the meantime Sri Baliarsingh himself has taken over the assignment as PIO in the Dept. After sharing this case, Sri Baliarsingh said that he felt quite happy for participating in such a healthy discussion. But he requested the participants not to launch scathing attack on the Government or Soochana Commission at this stage, but to wait for some more days.
Sri Kedar Sahoo, RTI Activist, Boudh
He had been to the office of Laxmi Prasad Panchayat in Boudh district for inspection of certain documents under Section-4 of the RTI Act. But he found that both PIO and Sarapanch were ignorant about such provision of the Act, and Sarapanch refused to show him any document under the Act. He had therefore to make an appeal to the concerned appellate authority, and on the orders of the latter only, he could get the desired information. This instance shows that the officials of the Government have not been trained about Section 4 of RTI Act 2005.
Sri N.A.Shah Ansari, Namaskar, Konark
Sri Ansari who heads the Namaskar network based at Konark gave 3 instances in connection with which they had gathered some experience as to how the Orissa Information Commission was behaving- two complaints under Section 18 about non-disclosure of information by public authorities as required under Section 4 and one case of a second appeal made against the PIO and 1st appellate officer of a govt office. In the two cases related to Section 4, the Commission has not started any work till date though several months have elapsed since the complaints were lodged and he himself representing the complainants has met the State Information Commissioner several times in the Commission’s office in the matter. And as regards the second appeal, though a date was fixed by the Commission for the hearing, only the appellant turned whereas the concerned respondent-officers abstained without showing any reason. It is strange that the Commission has not taken seriously the conspicuous failure of the respondents to respect the summons by the Commission, and neither the Commission appoints any further date for the hearing of the case, the result being the unnecessary prolongation of a state of uncertainty around this case. The last instance shows that the Commission is afraid of taking to task even petty officials of the State Government. If such be the state of affairs at the level of OSIC, which is supposed to be the highest penalizing authority under the Act, there is little chance for the RTI Act to register any progress in the State of Orissa.
He said that as per Section-4 of the Act all public authorities should take steps for proactive disclosure of 17 categories of information. But there is no penalty provision under the Act against non-compliance of this provision. Again, it is also not practicable to expect the State Govt. to prepare these documents within the given short span of time. Moreover, it is also not practically possible on the part of the citizens to exercise this provision either. The Section 4 can at best be used by the elite section of the society.
Sri Nishikant, Soochana Adhikar Manch, Bhubaneswar
Critically referring to the presentation made by Sri Pradeep Pradhan, Mr. Nishikant said that the Soochana Commission didn’t commit any mistake in providing support to the NGOs rallied under the banner of Soochana Adhikar Manch for stepping up the RTI Campaign in the State. Moreover, the Commission has not directly extended their support to Soochana Adhikar Manch.
With regard to the functioning of Orissa Soochana Commission, he felt that their role was transparent and praiseworthy. All accusation made against the Commission is baseless. Since violation of Section-4 does not invite any penalty under the Act, the Commission therefore can’t do anything. against anybody on this account.
Prof. Pradeep Sarkar of Vani Vihar Law College
He roundly refuted the argument given by both the previous speakers, Sri Nishkant and Sri Pradeep Baisakh. He said that the Section-4 is an important provision of the Act. As every one can see, in the Section itself, the word “shall” has always been used in place of ‘may’ or ‘should’. The wrong interpretation of the Act can only defeat the basic objective of the Act. He requested the house not to give credence to any subjective or arbitrary interpretation of the provisions of the Act. The Section-4 requires all public authorities to keep all the 17 categories of records ready for inspection and collection by the citizens. One shouldn’t take this provision lightly. Orissa Soochana Commission must ensure the proper enforcement of this provision by all the public authorities. Digging at the view of two previous speakers that the Act doesn’t provide for penalty against the violation of Section 4, Sri Sarkar threw back a question to them- Where does the Act say that no penalty proceedings can be initiated on account of violation of Section 4?
Sri Panchanan Kanungo, former Minister of State for Finance
Appreciating the persistent advocacy work for RTI done by the Orissa Right to Food Campaign for more than a year now, Sri Kanungo recalled his own involvement in this process right since inception. He further observed that if any time any hindrance is posed by any person or group to the successful implementation of the RTI Act in the State that should be immediately and boldly challenged and protested by the civil society at large. If for that matter Soochana Commission be found moving in a wrong direction and creating the problems for proper implementation of the RTI Act, then the civil society groups can first of all present a memorandum to them voicing their protest and demand a reply from them. If that won’t work, they can even gherao the Commission to make them listen to the people’s voice. Moreover, a Memorandum can be presented to the Governor too demanding a thorough review of the activities of the Soochana Commission.
Contributing to the discussion on the subject, prominent RTI activists Sri Lalit Mishra and Sri Tapan Mohapatra vociferously opposed the style of functioning of OSIC, especially their mode of distribution of money to some hand-picked NGOs affiliated to so-called Soochana Adhikar Manch in a non-transparent manner. They demanded immediate dismissal of the two Commissioners. For the purpose, they suggested that the house should take a resolution to place a Memorandum before the Governor Orissa requesting him to conduct a detail enquiry into the acts of omission and commission of the OSIC as permissible under Section 17 of the Act.
At the end, Prof. Santosh Tripathy in course of his presidential address presented a summary of the suggestions given by the participants. These were as follows.