Dear Sandip Babu
My posting on selection of Arunanchal Pradesh Information Commission as best Commission decided by Jury for National RTI Awards is just a circulation for information to the readers. I am neither delighted nor congratulating Mr. Arvind Kejriwal for this work which you have done. We are also not celebrating it. Because, since beginning, we have been opposing the methodology of the study which is still useless and unscientific. We have made a lot of postings pointing out how the methodology is wrong with erratic data, heap of garbage, analytical error etc. In context of decisions of Arunanchal Pradesh Information Commission as per survey report, it is also very discouraging. For example, Arunanchal Commission has disposed only 43 cases in a year (12 months). It means only 4 cases disposed by the Commission in a month. The Commissioner takes Rs. 1.5 lakh per month as salary and other allowances just to dispose 4 cases. On parameter “deterrent impact”. The Arunanchal Commission has secured just 17.50%. Shall we celebrate it with such a low performance whom jury has awarded as best Commission in the country. It is totally useless. Civil Society should oppose such study. On the hand, this is just to inform you that Mr. Kejriwal has not responded our queries till yet. We also know that he will never respond it. You can go through our last postings (13) where we have proved how how the survey is useless and full of garbage. In context of functioning of Orissa Commission, we have already done two studies making through analysis of the decisions of the commission which has been shared with Mr. Kejriwal during his visit to Orissa on 19th November'07 and later on through mails. We have not got any response from his side on our study findings. On the parameter “ deterrent impact” ( penalty) taken for study by Mr.Kejriwal team, Orissa Information Commission has secured just 29.33% which is highest in the country as per survey report. . Shall we celebrate it that Orissa Commission has done big job. On parameter “disposal and pendency”, two-member Orissa Commission has disposed just 36 cases in a month. It means one Commissioner disposes 18 cases per month ( less than one case in a day) taking 1.5 lakh per month from poor man’s exchequer. Shall we celebrate it. Shall we say that this is best performance. It is all bogus and useless. This study has no way helped us. We also hold the view that it will neither help the RTI Activists not the Information Commissioners at large in the country. With regards *Pradip Pradhan* *RTI Activist, Orissa* * * On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Sandip Dasverma < [email protected]> wrote: > Dear Pradip babu: > Thanks for the information. I am delighted that Arvind Kejriwal and his > team came up with this wonderful idea of comparing the performance of the > Information commissions, in spite of negative inputs of CIC, India. > > I would be delighted if Kiran Bedi becomes the next CIC and it would. With > her track record she will usher in an era where RTI will be an effective > tool against the injustice and back room manipulation. The question is will > the bureaucratic click allow one of it's jewels to take charge? Because of > her uncompromising and pro people stands, will she be considered serous > enough threat by them, to be kept out of power structure? I hope and wish > the PM will be make this possible and not compromise with wheelers and > dealers, to appoint a pliant one. > Those who have video access can see the press conference on RTI > performance<http://videos.livemint.com/watch/3702341-information-underload> > . > : http://videos.livemint.com/watch/3702341-information-underload > It tells us that RTI works at national level on 39% cases only. > Best wishes, > Sandip > > > > On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 7:17 AM, Pradip Pradhan <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> >> *Arunanchal Pradesh Information Commossion was declared as best >> Information Commission in the Country* >> >> Dear friends >> below is the official statement of Public Cause Research Fund. Jury >> finally selected Arunachal Pradesh Information Commission as best >> commission for National RTI award. >> >> Regards >> Pradip Pradhan >> >> Arunachal Pradesh received a very high Overall Public Satisfaction (OPS) >> of 85%. This means that if 100 people approached Arunachal Pradesh >> Information Commission, 85 of them finally got the information they were >> seeking. This is almost three times the national average of 26%. The state >> is very high on getting its orders implemented. In 91% of the orders passed >> by Arunachal Pradesh commission, people got the information. The Commission >> does not close a case till the appellant registers his/her satisfaction. So, >> they follow the practice of “continuing mandamus” >> >> The Commissions is very strong on enforcement. In 45 cases that it >> disposed, penalties were imposed on 25 officers in 2006-07. In the calendar >> year 2008, they imposed penalties in 18% cases. >> >> Most of the people that we spoke to were full of praise for their >> commission. The PIOs are scared of violating RTI provisions. >> In the year 2009, the commission became the only commission to issue >> bail-able arrest warrants against an officer who did not comply with >> commission’s orders. During 2008, the commission issued 43 orders, out of >> which 40 orders were passed in favor of disclosures. On an average, it takes >> four months time between filing an appeal and getting information after all >> the hearings in this state. The commission with just 43 cases, has four >> commissioners. Certainly, the commission does not need so many >> commissioners. However, the commissioners are appointed by the state >> government and the commission has little role in it. The commissioners >> rarely pass orders as a single bench. Most of the orders are passed by them >> collectively as one bench. Therefore, they are being honoured collectively >> as a commission. >> >> It may be argued that since they have such small number of cases, it is >> possible for them to monitor cases and ensure satisfaction. However, the >> data does not support this. There are more than 25 commissioners in the >> country who disposed less than one order per day. However, their compliance >> and satisfaction ratios are pretty low. The commission had zero pendency at >> the end of the year. >> >> *Jury Statement* >> ** >> *Non-compliance of the orders of Information Commissions and huge >> pendencies of appeals and complaints emerge as the two big problems in the >> functioning of Information Commissions. >> >> *Interestingly, it is good practices adopted by some of them, which >> provide the solution. The states of Bihar, Orissa, Uttarakhand, Gujarat, >> Karnataka, Arunachal Pradesh and Punjab follow the practice of “continuing >> mandamus” i.e. they do not close a case till such time as the appellant >> reports compliance. And that could be one of the reasons why they are higher >> than others in terms of compliance. However, they are low on enforcement. >> *Repeated hearings (in some cases more than 15 hearings), sometimes >> spanning into a few years, tires out a citizen. >> * >> Therefore, it is time for Information Commissioners to implement the law >> as mandated following the principle of maximum disclosures. They have the >> power to create an atmosphere of strong deterrence – that RTI violations >> would not be tolerated. On one hand there is a need to strictly deal with >> every RTI violation, on the other hand, following the example of Arunachal >> Pradesh, the commissioners are empowered, barring exceptional cases, to >> invoke their powers of arrest and production of documents if the officer >> does not provide satisfactory information. >> >> Information, in many cases, loses its relevance, if provided two years >> after filing RTI. Strong enforcement would also reduce pendencies as that >> would reduce the inflow of complaints and appeals at Information >> Commissions. >> >> Out of roughly 52,000 orders, in negligible number of cases had the >> Commissioners found that RTI was misused or that it was a case of frivolous >> RTI. If at all such cases came, they were adequately handled by Information >> Commissions. We, therefore, do not feel a need to amend RTI Act to give >> power of refusal of frivolous RTIs to PIOs. >> >> *We congratulate the winners and hope this award would motivate them to >> carry on with their good work and inspire others. >> >> * > > > > > -- > PS: Please acknowledge the mail if you receive it. > > Sandip K. Dasverma > Richland, > WA-99354, USA > Message: Use Compact Fluorescent Lamps(CFL) to replace filament bulbs. Save > trees, save energy and save money. > And now they are <$1/piece > WLED(White Light Emitting Diodes) are the nextGen lighting source. With > Solar they will revolutionize human life. >
