Dear Danish I regret to again inform you about our Cross-Posting Rules. This is a Rule which was overwhelmingly voted in a poll / referendum of our members, so I am not acting as like Mr. Gaddafi on this issue.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/surveys?id=12630484 "Question: To what degree should "Cross Posting" on this list be permitted. Responses Choices Votes % reply Freely and without restrictions 1 3% Members should use own discretion whilst forwarding original content 3 11% CP'ing crowds my email box 4 15% Very limited degree (Occasionally) 8 30% Not at all 10 38% " The evidence against you " FromDanish Raza <[email protected]> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], india_wba <[email protected]> dateTue, May 4, 2010 at 5:46 PM subject[rti4empowerment] Centre lists its grouses with the right to information " On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Danish Raza <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Centre lists its grouses with the right to information > > The proposal to amend RTI law includes 11 sections that would need to be > changed, says a DoPT reply to an information request > Danish Raza | New Delhi | May 03 2010 > > For the first time, the Centre has listed the sections of the RTI Act 2005 -- > 11 in number -- that it finds problematic and the amendments that it deems > desirable, mentioning its unease over disclosure of Cabinet papers, > "sensitivity" of the office of the CJI, and the need to give "partial > exemption to organizations possessing sensitive information". > > "Government is examining a proposal regarding amendment to the Act which, in > brief, covers... " says Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) in its > April 30, 2010 reply to an RTI request from Subhash Chandra Agrawal, before > listing 11 sections that have been deemed to require amendments. > > "Amendment to Section 7 so as to avoid frivolous and vexatious requests; > amendment to Section 8 so as to slightly modify the provision about > disclosure of Cabinet papers, to ensure smooth functioning of the government > and to take care of the sensitivity of the office of the CJI," says number 3 > of the list of areas that, according to the government, need amendment. > > It can be recalled that in November last year, outgoing chief justice of > India K.G. Balakrishnan wrote a letter to the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh > requesting that his office should not come under the transparency law. Later, > a communication between Singh and UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi also revealed > the latter's intention to take CJI's office out of the purview of the RTI Act. > The DoPT reply also lists "amendment to Section 24 so as to incorporate a > provision about partial exemption of organization possessing sensitive > information," which appears to be a proposal to add more agencies to the list > of 22 organisations that are exempted from the Act. > > To remove the ambiguity as to "whether a particular NGO be treated as a > public authority or not", the government is considering amending Section 2 > which defines a public authority that are required by the law to respond to > requests for information, says the DoPT reply. Amendment to Section 4 "so as > to enlarge the scope of suo motu disclosure" is also under consideration. > Other proposals listed in the DoPT reply are amendments to Sections 12 and 15 > to make a provision about "giving the current charge of the post of the chief > information commissioner to any information commissioner." > > The DoPT reply came on an RTI application that Agrawal filed in March. > Agrawal had sought a copy of the proposed changes in the RTI Act. > It's well known that citizen groups and RTI advocates have been vehemently > opposing any proposal to amend the RTI Act. > > “We have repeatedly told the government that there is an urgent need for > proper implementation of the Act rather than introducing any amendments,” > Shekhar Singh, member, National campaign for people’s right to information > (NCPRI), told Governance Now. > > According to Manish Sisodia, another RTI activist and founder, Kabir, the > amendments will result in weakening of the Act. “In the recent past, > important information has come out in public domain because of the RTI Act. > The government cannot see this happening and want to curb the information > flow by introducing amendments. It will be great if they can first fully > implement the sections that they want to amend,” said he. > > > ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
