Dear Sidharth The 3 people I have named (and many others) are members of what is called "NCPRI" (although Ms.Medha Patkar is not listed as an office-bearer of NCPRI nowadays). Mr Shailesh Gandhi was the convenor of this group till RTI_India exposed that he was holding this position while being an IC.
The function of NCPRI is to occupy the Civil Society space for RTI and not let the citizens be heard directly. In other words they are stooges / ventriloquist dummy for the State in the RTI space. Whatever the Govt wants to implement for RTI is done through these quislings. It should come as no surprise therefore that the bulk of NCPRI's working committee are either ex-baboos or have accepted significant funding from the State or have served on various sarkari commissions / committees. To expect these people to project the POV of independent citizens is wishful thinking. Baboos (incidentally the word is derived from "baboon") like Mr Habibullah feel safe and comfortable having such pet poodles around at their functions and to organise them. People like you and me who can bark back at them are to be kept out at all costs. I am in the CIC's bad books after I wrote here about the private alcoholic boozing sessions (CICs and SICs only) organised at the first 2006 Convention. Now to address your specific issues:- 1) NCPRI IS a "mafia", make no mistake about it. Since this group is uncensored they are welcome to debate / dispute it. 2) Since the CIC has been sub-contracting the running of their Conventions post 2008 to NCPRI, they ensure that the non-State actors picked are their man. ( see for eg the 2008 speaker list http://cic.gov.in/convention-2008/ListOfSpeakers.pdf) Each and every panel of 2008 had at least one of "their" people. And for the purists who say that panel (vi) " RTI in South Asia an overview" did not, I beg to correct them ;-) 3) Assam has refused to have him. So now they are planning to send him to Saudi Arabia as Ambassador. Sarbajit --- In [email protected], Sidharth <sidharthb...@...> wrote: > > Dear Sarbajit, > > I have no idea whether the persons you mentioned are part of any Mafia > Gang or not. But certainly it's not their fault if they are invited to > this annual convention. > > Should they have refused to participate out of solidarity with those > who are left out ? > > Btw any idea when this man leaves CIC and who is replacing him ? The > rumours are getting unbearable. > > > > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 11:59 AM, sroy1947 <sroy1...@...> wrote: > > > > > > > > http://cic.gov.in/convention-2009/listofspeakers.htm > > > > Finally, with the publication of this list - and that too at the very last > > minute - the CIC has conceded that it is firmly within the grip of the > > NCPRI RTI mafia. > > > > Each and every non-official speaker connected with RTI at this convention > > inexplicably belongs to the NCPRI "mafia". > > > > Let me name them all here:- > > > > 1) Shekhar Singh > > 2) Medha Patkar > > 3) Venkatesh Nayak > > > > Is this what the CIC means by its section 4(1)(b)(vii) disclosure ?? > > http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Section4/Section-4-1-b-vii.pdf > > > > "Consultation with the members of the Public > > > > 1. 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. > > > > 2. 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. > > > > 3. Individual Comments are welcome. These issues are examined and > > are taken up at the Annual Convention if deemed fit." > > > > THIS IS WHAT I HAVE TO TELL MR HABIBULLAH:- > > > > If you MUST organise these conventions for the limited benefit of > > particular NGO then please do so with your personal funds and not ours. > > >
