Cops can’t deny info that don’t hamper probe: CIC

Cops can’t deny info that don’t hamper probe: CIC

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/cops-cant-deny-info-that-dont-hamper-probe-cic/790738/
In a significant order, the state Chief Information Commission (CIC) has ruled that the police department is liable to furnish such information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act which do not relate to state or national security or directly affect an ongoing investigation.
The CIC said police agencies cannot deny information relating to general crimes to citizens under the RTI Act citing conditional exemption.
The CIC order came on an RTI application filed by one Devilal Bherumal Parikh, a resident of Bhaipura village in Vadol taluka of Tapi district, who had sought information relating to the murder of his son Ashish from the Public Information Officer (PIO), Bardoli Police Station and Deputy Superintendent of Police, CID(Crime).
Parikh's son went missing in April 2008. Later, his body was cremated without any investigation and postmortem by the Bardoli police, which claimed it was unidentified. When he was denied details about his son's death, he filed an RTI application in October 2008 and asked for a copy of his own statement taken by the police, a copy of the accused's polygraphy test and narco analysis report and related records.
When the local police did not respond, Parikh approached the Superintendent of Police, Surat (rural), who is appellate authority under the RTI Act. The case was given to a DySP at CID (Crime) of Vadodara Zone. Once again, the applicant was denied information on the ground that section 8(1) of the RTI Act exempted the agency from giving out certain information.
Following this, Parikh filed a second appeal in the CIC, which ruled that the police were liable to furnish the information the complainant had asked for since section 8(1) only exempted information on "investigation to a person which the investigating officer knows to be guilty of an arrestable offence and who may have the intention of preventing or delaying his arrest or prosecution".
Chief Information Commissioner R N Das noted in his order that the condition did not apply in the present case where the complainant is the father of deceased. The CIC also criticised the denial of a copy of the complainant's own statement to him by the PIO. The CIC has also asked the Additional Director General of Police (CID) to pass appropriate orders to all his officers to not reject RTI applications outright, citing exemption.

SC can't deny info if plea filed under RTI Act. In a conflict, RTI Act will prevail over Supreme Court rules: CIC

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/SC-cant-deny-info-if-plea-filed-under-RTI-Act-CIC/articleshow/8284881.cms

SC can't deny info if plea filed under RTI Act: CIC

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has overturned its own decision and ruled that the Supreme Court cannot deny information on judicial matters if an applicant has asked for it under the Right to Information Act.
As of now, information disclosure related to a person's own case could be applied to the Supreme Court under the RTI Act. But in case the information related to judicial matters of a third party, the SC had ruled that application must be made under court rules. Rule 2 of the SC Rules says the applicant must establish "good cause" before disclosure is made, which according to the CIC goes against the RTI Act.
In his order, information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi said that he disagreed with former chief information commissioner Wajahat Habibullah's decision.
His order said, "This bench further rules that all citizens have the right to access information under Section 3 of the RTI Act and PIOs shall provide the information sought to the citizens, subject always to the provisions of the RTI Act only."
He added, "It is the citizen's prerogative to decide under which mechanism, that is under the method prescribed by the public authority or the RTI Act, he would like to obtain the information."
The decision came after Gurgaon resident R S Mishra had asked for information related to letters he had written to the SC. The apex court had denied the information on the argument that the SC had a specific provision by which information was furnished under Order XII of the SC Rules and hence, information relating to judicial matters could be provided only under that provision. The SC PIO further argued that since the then chief information commissioner had upheld this contention, their arguments before this commission were already covered under the said decisions.

===

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2013124.ece

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has ruled that in a conflict between the Right to Information Act and the internal rules of a Public Authority, the RTI Act must prevail. It would prevail even if the internal rules pertain to the Supreme Court.
CIC Shailesh Gandhi passed this order in a case, in which information on certain judicial records was sought from the Supreme Court under the RTI Act. The First Appellate Authority (FFA) in the court held that any information on judicial records could be accessed only under Order XII of the Supreme Court rules.
The judicial records pertained to letters written to judges by R.S. Misra, appellant in the case. Mr. Misra, who wrote the letters in connection with a Special Leave Petition filed by him, wanted to know their status and filed an application under the RTI Act.
Mr. Gandhi held that the Supreme Court could not cite internal rules to deny information if it had been sought under the RTI Act. Further that information could be denied only if the information sought was prohibited under the RTI Act itself.
"The right to information is a fundamental right of the citizen of India. This has been clearly recognised by the Supreme Court in several decisions and subsequently codified by Parliament in 2005. The RTI Act was enacted with the spirit of ensuring transparency...Section 3 of the RTI Act lays down that subject to the provisions of the RTI Act, all citizens shall have the right to information… Further Section 22 of the RTI Act expressly provides that the provisions of the RTI Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than the RTI Act. In other words, where there is any inconsistency in a law as regards furnishing of information, such law shall be superseded by the RTI Act. Insertion of a non-obstante clause in Section 22 of the RTI Act was a conscious choice of Parliament to safeguard the citizens' fundamental right to information…If the PIO has received a request for information under the RTI Act, the information shall be provided to the applicant as per the provisions of the RTI Act and any denial of the same must be in accordance with Sections 8 and 9 of the RTI Act only.."

full text @

http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SM_A_2011_000237_SG_12351_M_56284.pdf

Indian Institute of Banking and Finance (IIBF) is beyond RTI ambit: Delhi HC

Indian Institute of Banking and Finance (IIBF) is beyond RTI ambit: Delhi HC

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court today said an organisation cannot be forced to disclose information under the RTI Act just because it is substantially financed by PSUs and held that the Indian Institute of Banking and Finance (IIBF) is not a public authority.
IIBF is a professional body of banks, managed by a board comprising members from PSU banks, with its membership of over 700 banks and financial institutions as its institutional members.

The court said an organisation should be funded by the appropriate government in order to make it liable to public scrutiny under the transparency law.
The court passed the order while setting aside the order of Central Information Commission of declaring Indian Institute of Banking and Finance(IIBF) a public authority.

"It is possible that the member banks, for instance, the State Bank of India, is itself a public authority. However, substantial financing by the SBI would itself not make it a public authority. It would have to be shown that the appropriate government itself directly or indirectly finances or has financed it," justice S Muralidhar said.
The CIC, in its order, had justified declaring IIBF as a public body saying the executive bodies of the Institute are substantially manned by senior executives of public sector banks and the bulk of its finances also come directly or indirectly from those banks.
"The Institute, a non-governmental organisation, being substantially financed by public sector banks directly and indirectly, is nothing but a public authority," the CIC had said.
Setting aside the order, Justice Muralidhar said "this Court is not able to concur with the impugned order of the CIC dated February 9, 2010 which is hereby set aside".
-PTI

http://www.zeenews.com/news644497.html

CIC to Delhi Govt: put all draft bills in public domain

CIC to Delhi Govt: put all draft bills in public domain

To keep citizens better informed on the government's proposed policies, the country's transparency watchdog has directed Delhi government to put all its draft-stage policies and legislations in public domain. The Central Information Commission (CIC) issued the order after a Right To Information applicant, 

Venkatesh Nayak of Sarvodaya Enc-lave, didn't get a copy of the draft Delhi Police (Amendment) Bill, which have implications of how the police function in the Capital. Nayak had to lodge a complaint with the CIC against the Delhi Police and the Home Department for failing to voluntarily disclose the information under Section 4 of the RTI Act. The two bodies, then, uploaded the draft legislation on their websites for public comments.

"The public authority should have disclosed the contents of the Delhi Police Bill suo moto. By omitting to do so, the very purpose of Section 4 of the RTI Act stands defeated," said Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi, in his order.

He said the Commission has observed that the Delhi government was not fully complying with Section 4 of the Act. "The commission is of the view that the citizens must be provided with the means to debate legislative and policy changes which are likely to affected public lives," the order read.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/CIC-to-Delhi-Govt-put-all-draft-bills-in-public-domain/Article1-570488.aspx

People facing criminal charges using RTI Act to bolster defence

People facing criminal charges using RTI Act to bolster defence

http://www.livemint.com/2010/06/29211718/People-facing-criminal-charges.html?atype=tp

People facing criminal charges are seeking details of their cases from probe agencies through the Right to Information (RTI) Act, and using it to bolster their defence.

While some detectives and lawyers call this a misuse of the law that allows citizens to easily access information available with any public authority, RTI officials and activists say the trend is only bringing more transparency to the execution of criminal justice.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) received at least 4,000 applications to provide information under the RTI Act last year. Most of them were from the relatives and lawyers of people accused in various cases.

“The CBI has a policy of providing maximum information under the RTI Act,” director Ashwani Kumar said. “Out of 4,086 requests received during the year 2009, information was provided in 95% cases.”

He added that the trend was affecting CBI investigations and trials. “Whenever the CBI feels that disclosure of information can affect investigation, it seeks exemption under existing provisions of the Act. However, it has been found that many times, the accused misuse the provisions.”

R.S. Sodhi, a retired Delhi high court judge and a lawyer, said information accessed through the RTI Act can weaken the prosecution’s case. “The accused can misuse the information. Lawyers can argue in the court that there exists an alternative theory and the accused is not guilty. It then becomes difficult for the prosecuting agency to prove their case,” Sodhi said.

But there are instances of the accused receiving justice after accessing information through the RTI Act.

Last week, the Delhi high court asked the city police to initiate criminal proceedings against three policemen for falsely implicating a man in a criminal case. The victim obtained information for his acquittal through the RTI Act.

“Getting information from agencies through court is a long-drawn process. Earlier, CBI was not very transparent in sharing the information,” said chief information commissioner Wajahat Habibullah.

Noted RTI activist Arvind Kejriwal said the Act has enough safeguards to ensure that the interests of the state are not harmed. “The Act clearly states that if the disclosure of any information is likely to impede the process of investigation, the same should not be disclosed,” he said.