Re: [HumJanenge] Breaking: DoPT Circular on draft RTI Rules

To:
The Secretary/Ministry of Personnel
North Block

BY EMAIL

21.January.2011

Kind Attn: Ms. Alka Sirohi

Dear Madam,

Sub: Amendments to draft RTI Rules and associated matters

This is further to (and as an aide memoir) to our telecon today.

1) I am attaching a PDf file containing an OM dated 27.12.2010 issued by
Mr. K.G.Verma/director(RTI) on the above subject. It is pertinent that this
OM is not published on website of the persmin, but was obtained from
website of DoT. The gist of this OM is that a large number of persons have
opposed the proposed 250 word limit and 1 subject rule for RTI requests.

2) From this OM, I am surprised to see that the approximately 276 responses
submitted by myself and other members of our RTI mailing lists (ie.
stakeholders)
SUPPORTING the proposed 250 word limit and 1 subject rule appear not to have
been considered at all. This is doubly curious considering that I am reliably
informed that only about 400 comments running into about 2,000 pages were
received by persmin within the period specified to these draft Rules.

3) I am also constrained to inform you that I am reliably informed
that this fresh
OM of 27.12.2010 was issued solely to facilitate the NAC (National Advisory
Council) to submit proper comments on the draft rules. It is clearly
in the public
domain (website of NAC http://nac.nic.in minutes of meeting dt. 10.01.2011)
that the NAC has submitted some half baked comments and expects the DoPT
to grant them more time. I hence say that this discriminates against individuals
like me who have filed detailed and well reasoned comments on the proposed
RTI Rules, and which appear not to have been considered.

4) I am also constrained to convey that despite the MoP being the nodal Ministry
for RTI Act and despite the passage of 5 years of the RTI Act, the MoP has
not been able to publish its own basic mandatory proactive disclosure. This
includes processes for consultations with members of the public. This is
also the subject of my pending formal RTI requests and RTI Appeals to
your Ministry which are not being replied to within the time limit. I have also
regularly represented these points to our predecessor Mr Shantanu Consul
but to no avail. In my view, such non-disclosure allows RTI touts such as
Ms Aruna Roy ensconced within the NAC to manipulate the situation to
their personal advantage. It is also pertinent, and as I have communicated
to MoP, that certain of the NAC's comments to draft RTI Rules appear to
be plagiarised from my own work.

I therefore request you to kindly look into the brief points I have made
so that ordinary citizens like me can also participate in statutory processes
of your department/ministry on an equal footing.

Thanking you and with best wishes

Sarbajit Roy

B-59 Defence Colony
New Delhi 110024
tel : 09311448069

enclo: 1 PDF file

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 10:49 PM, ashish kr1965 <ashishkr1965@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Sarbajit: A new DoPT OM attached on Draft RTI Rules: Ashish
>