Dear Sharmaji / members Many thanks for this post. I visited the CIC website to read these minutes but then got entranced by Mr Habibullah's latest order (31 pages) for Mr S C Agrawal.
I think its time to wrap up this debate. If someone else can polish it up, we'll then all (sorry only members with Yahoo ID) VOTE on it (to make it more universal) and forward it to Mr Habibullah in terms of section 4(1)(b)(vii). Sarbajit --- In [email protected], "S.D. Sharma" <anonsha...@...> wrote: > > Dear Sarbjit / RTI group > > The CIC MOM for 21-July-2009 is on website. > http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Minutes/Minutes21072009.pdf > > As usual Habibullah has shown his undisguised disregard and contempt > for Citizens > > S D SHARMA > > "Agenda 2: Action Plan for the proposed convention, 2009 > Commission was apprised of the confirmations received from the > speakers regarding the convention. Commission indicated some more > names who may be contacted for seeking their convenience to attend the > convention. It agreed to the proposal of the secretariat to invite > lead speakers from vernacular journalism. While finalizing the foreign > delegates the Commission decided to invite representatives from the > SAARC countries including Bhutan, and also from Indonesia, Afghanistan > and South Africa. Commission further agreed to constitute two > committees to overview the preparation of the convention in regard to > the academics and the participants. Regarding the distribution of > literature and display of > documents the Commission desired to continue with the earlier > practice. Commission further desired to bring about a brochure of the > articles/research papers/success stories and best practices on RTI, > which will also be a part of the literature for distribution. It > further desired to request the Economic & Political Weekly (EPW) to > bring out a special issue on RTI." > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:35 PM, ashish kr1965<ashishkr1...@...> wrote: > > Topic: > > > > "This House believes that the Central Information Commission is > > squandering public funds & exceeding its power and functions (as > > defined in Chapter V of the RTI Act, 2005) by organizing annual > > "Conventions" / "Conferences", whilst neglecting its statutory duties > > (which are strictly limited to disposing of Complaints, Appeals, the > > awarding of penalties, and preparing an annual report per the Act)." > > > > "FOR" the motion > > 1) Sarbajit Roy > > 2) Dr Vishnu Mutthu > > 3) S D SHARMA > > 4) Ashish Kappoo > > > > "AGAINST" the motion > > 1 - Nicholas Santiago > > > > Arguments FOR: > > > > 1) CIC has no powers in law to hold conferences / conventions. Because > > > > a) CIC is a creature of the RTI Act and must act within the 4 corners > > of the parent Act, > > > > b) The Act bestows powers (for various situations) to the CIC in > > sections 18 - 20 of the RTI Act, > > > > c) Additional duties to "monitor", "report" implementation of the RTI > > Act are imposed on the CIC by section 25. > > > > d) Section 25 also permits the CIC to recommend improvements in a > > Public Authority's RTI practice. > > > > 2) In the absence of any express power /duty conferred by the Act to > > hold such conventions, it is incumbent upon the CIC to inform which of > > the powers requiring CIC to "monitor, report implementation of RTI > > Act" or "arrangements to consult with the public" etc are the > > provisions relied upon to hold such Conventions. In this context, > > > > a) Section 4(1)(b)(viii) of RTI Act only requires every Public > > Authority to "PUBLISH" the "the particulars of any arrangement that > > exists for consultation with, or representation by, the members of the > > public in relation to the formulation of its policy or implementation > > thereof;" this does not "REQUIRE" any public authority to make such > > arrangements for the public. > > > > b) Such arrangements are only to be made for the PUBLIC. Habibullah > > has illegally extended this to include "CIVIL SOCIETIES" and "NGO" and > > to exclude citizens. The bare reading of CIC's disclosure reveals that > > whereas each and every NGO representation shall be placed before the > > Convention, the feedback from the citizens (public) are only placed > > before Convention (if at all) when "deemed fit". This arrangement is > > characteristic of the despotic regime at CIC and smacks of > > arbitrariness. It is surprising that such high handed processes find > > mention in the mandatory section 4(1)(b) disclosure. > > > > 3) On such convened occasions only the citizens who use RTI Act should > > be invited to speak. Unfortunately, past experience suggests that only > > a few favored NGOs (mainly affiliated to the NCPRI) are being > > repeatedly selected/invited. > > http://cic.gov.in/convention-2008/ListOfSpeakers.pdf . Accordingly, > > there should be no arbitrariness while selecting citizen speakers / > > invitees and all affected citizens should be allowed within to have > > their complete say as part of a statutory process. Furthermore, > > > > a) The topics for discussion should be confined to those permitted / > > conceived by the scheme of the RTI Act. > > > > b) There should be no discrimination amongst classes of RTI users, > > > > c) As the RTI Act extends recognition only those NGOs covered within > > definition of "public authority", other NGOs/ Civil Society > > should be excluded from such proceedings / gatherings. > > > > d) Converting an RTI forum to a platform for selected NGOs to > > publicize themselves and hawk their wares internationally (as the 3rd > > Convention did) is against the letter and spirit of RTI Act, and a > > betrayal of the common citizen. > > > > 5) The limited budget of CIC (for which CIC is accountable to the > > citizenry) is being squandered on such tamashas. > > > > a) Why is so much food served, wasted at these Conventions ! When many > > aware citizens had complained to Mr. Habibullah about the images of > > conspicuous consumption and waste published on CIC web site, Mr. > > Habibullah's response was to DELETE all the images from CIC web site. > > Now all that remains now on CIC website are a few images of people > > eating like Anna Hazare with Manoj Pai etc. > > > > http://cic.gov.in/Conference/Gallery-new/14thOct/images/IMG_3573.jpg > > http://cic.gov.in/Conference/Gallery-new/14thOct/images/IMG_3579.jpg > > http://cic.gov.in/Conference/Gallery-new/14thOct/images/IMG_3576.jpg > > > > Arguments AGAINST: > > > > 1) Convening such jamborees is a welcome step for Civil Society. The > > RTI disclosure [http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Section4/Section-4-1-b-vii.pdf] > > of the Central Commission clearly envisages "Consultation with the > > members of the Public" and goes on to say > > > > "Interaction with civil society and public already exists - either > > through the electronic mails or through "feedback". Commission does > > receive the view points through both these means. > > > > -The Civil Society/NGOs' views are placed before the Convention every > > year and its recommendations, if any, to be passed on to the > > Government for appropriate action. > > > > -Individual Comments are welcome. These issues are examined and are > > taken up at the Annual Convention if deemed fit." > > > > Notes: > > 1) Kindly identify yourself as "FOR" or "AGAINST" the motion while > > setting out your case. > > > > 2) Kindly add to / modify the arguments already listed up till the > > time you post. > > > > 3) Kindly ensure that your contributions to the arguments are > > supported with some basis (either in "law" or in "fact"). Cite these > > as footnotes to your post. > > > > 4) Kindly do not vandalise / delete existing contributions of other members. > > > > 5) Use the previous Active Debates, as a guide to what we can achieve > > together. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/message/4360 > > >
