Re: [IAC#RG] Congress tables RTI Amendment Bill 2013 in Lok Sabha

dear sarbjit
U and I know where is the fault in our system RTI is unwanted if we got better system in place. u and me have enough experience how our top courts are violating equal status provision of our constitution. now how we can try to change the system? 

Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Sureshan

One of my RTI matters was the very first one decided by the CIC on who is a public authority. It is pending after 7 years before a single judge of Delhi High Court and has been in and out of that High Court.

The CIC's decision ran into 35 pages
www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/Decision_30112006_12.pdf

and it is still the only REAL FULL BENCH order of the CIC where all ICs sat and the Chief Commissioner delivered the decision on behalf of all the ICs.

So please, I know all the arguments and counter-arguments and most citations about public authority, "instrumentality of state" Art 12, etc s/s 2(h) etc etc at my fingertips.

My problem is that ASG Mr Chandiok had appeared for the DISCOMS and he continued to appear for the DISCOMS even after becoming a Law Officer/ASG. I could not match him (we both know why) in Delhi High Court so matter has languished and no judge wants to move matter forward now.

The new RTI Amendment Bill (as tabled) does not take political parties out of entire 2(h), it essentially takes them out of 2(h)(b) only - which defn. was never applicable to them in the first place.

To clarify this aspect, can I ask if you admit that your political party was "established or constituted" BY any law of Parliament?

So, in a nutshell, what does the amending bill say:-

(i) Political Parties did/do not fall under ANY of the sub-heads of 2(h) to qualify them as public authority. 

(ii) Information about political parties as private entities can still be accessed under RTI Act without any hitch, subject to the standard exemptions.

Sarbajit

On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 3:20 PM, SURESHAN P <sureshandelhi@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Sarbajit 

great reading of this proposed amendment ,, Once the political parties are taken away from the ambit of body of associations U find that still political parties are within the purview of RTI. that is section  32 a complimentary provision to new amendment . which gives the amendment's protection to the parties against any order was passed, ....... This is ur greatness ,nobody can find out this much ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 

thanks 

On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

1) The Bill, as it is, exposes that the underlying CIC decision of 3.Jun.2013 is flawed. (I have always said the CIC order is flawed  from day 1).

2) The Bill makes it very clear (by a new explanation to section 2(h)) that political parties were not covered in RTI as bodies/NGOs established BY any law passed by Parliament - and that they are registered/recognised UNDER provisions of the RPA 1951.

'Explanation.––The expression "authority or body or institution of self government established or constituted" by any law made by Parliament shall not include any association or body of individuals registered or recognised as political party under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.'.

3) The Bill goes on to clarify (by a new section 32) that any registered / recognised political party will be subject to RTI Act (as amended) notwithstanding any judgment / order /decree of any Court or Commission

"32. Notwithstanding anything contained in any judgment, decree or order of any court or commission, the provisions of this Act, as amended by the Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2013, shall have effect and shall be deemed always to have effect, in the case of any association or body of individuals registered or recognized as political party under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 or any other law for the time being in force and the rules made or notifications issued thereunder.".

But this i