Dear Nangiaji, I also agree with you. Mr Krishna and I are looking at the same problem from different approaches - and trying to attack the problem in separate ways.
1) At RTI_India we allow everybody (including public servants) to free post and do not censor / moderate anybody. We are a publicly viewable group (unlike all the other major RTI Yahoo groups). At Mr Krishna's group rti4empowerment the messages are moderated (and perhaps censored) and messages are only accessible to members. If there is a difference in the level of debate / discussion arising from these approaches it is not for me to comment on. 2) The serving officers on the group are well aware of the possibility of misuse of CCS Rules and other similar such laws against them. Even honest officers are routinely harassed and victimised by their bretheren by false cases as Mr Krishna (who, as per CIC / BHEL websites, was facing CBI and Criminal cases) can attest to. 3) The definition of Political movement is not mine. It exists in law, it is very broad / encompassing, and we must be aware of such laws and take suitable precautions. Regards Sarbajit --- In [email protected], suresh nangia <sknangia2...@...> wrote: > > > Dear Shri Sarabjit >  >     I agree with the views expressed by Shri Dhirendra Krishna. I am > afraid your contention that internet groups like "rti_india" are political > internet groups, is not correct. The common bondage between members / > subscribers to this group, is not any political ideology: it is their > involvement and / or degree of commitment for promoting the cause of RTI > that binds them and brings them together for bonding for that cause.Most > of the subscribers to this group, I am sure, do not have any personal > acquaintence with each other; they may have not even met each other in person > at any time.I have not met you any time nor do I know Shri Krishna In the > given scenario, there cannot be any political affiliation or commonality of > political leaning, leave aside political ideology, amongst the group > members. It may not, therefore, be appropiate to say that some person who is > working with a Government Department qnd / or with a Public Sector > Undertaking is barred from expressing himself on matters relating to RTI > and the problems in implementing RTI Act in its spirti and content. > Nor do his serevice rules debar him from expressing himself on issues > involving RTI. Service Rulels do place a bar on all public sevants from > being part of political groups. But even this bar does not debar them >  from exercising their right of casting vote in elections where political > parties participate for contesting elections based on political ideologies, > and most ofter almost all public servants cast their votes for one political > party or the other. The act of casting vote does not make them a political > affiliate of the political party for which they may have  voted. So, we need > not discourage or debar any public servant from expressing himself on rti > board, if he feels like sharing his views.  >  > S K NANGIA >
