Saturday, August 20, 2011

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: subversion of the rti act

Dear All,
We all must understand that our empowerment by RTI act does not mean
that we are above rest of the world. If there is any problem with the
actions of an officer/office then we must exhaust all available
remedies to take care of it. If someone is not having a knowledge of
the available of the remedies, the fault lies with him and not with
the head of state.

On 8/21/11, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> To:
> Mr P M Ravindran
>
> I do not know why I am repeatedly receiving such rude, scandalous and
> ill conceived emails from you. Kindly stop sending me such emails. I
> particularly object to phrases in your emails which betray disrespect
> for the Constitution of India and its offices. I am given to
> understand that you are an ex-serviceman, and I opine that stoppage of
> your pension and other post-retirement benefits would be a fitting
> penalty for your disrespect, and I sincerely hope that Madam
> President, to whom you have addressed your offensive email, takes
> swift and appropriate action.
>
> Sarbajit Roy
>
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Ravindran P M <pmravindran@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Ms Pratibha Devi Singh Patil, President of India,
>>
>> Firstly, please note that I am not endorsing copy of this e mail to the PM
>> because I am amoung those who believe that the earlier the present
>> incumbent
>> is kicked out of that office the better it will be for the country.
>>
>> Next, I am writing this to you to bring to your attention the blatant
>> subversion of the RTI Act by the public servants of whom you are the
>> executive head and is responsible to set the wrongs right.
>>
>> Please see the DoPT OM No F/10/02/2008-IR dated 24 Sep 2010 in the
>> document
>> attached.
>>
>> Now, your attention is invited to Sec 6 of the RTI Act which is reproduced
>> for your study:
>>
>> 6     (1)  A person, who desires to obtain any information under this Act,
>> shall make a request in writing or through electronic means in English or
>> Hindi or in the official language of the area in which the application is
>> being made, accompanying such fee as may be prescribed, to—
>>             (a)     the Central Public Information Officer or State Public
>> Information Officer, as the case may be, of the concerned public
>> authority;
>>             (b)     the Central Assistant Public Information Officer or
>> State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be,
>>
>> specifying the particulars of the information sought by him or her:
>>
>> Provided that where such request cannot be made in writing, the Central
>> Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the
>> case
>> may be, shall render all reasonable assistance to the person making the
>> request orally to reduce the same in writing.
>>       (2)
>>
>> An applicant making request for information shall not be required to give
>> any reason for requesting the information or any other personal details
>> except those that may be necessary for contacting him.
>>       (3)           Where an application is made to a public authority
>> requesting for an information,—
>>             (i)     which is held by another public authority; or
>>             (ii)     the subject matter of which is more closely connected
>> with the functions of another public authority,
>>
>> the public authority, to which such application is made, shall transfer
>> the
>> application or such part of it as may be appropriate to that other public
>> authority and inform the applicant immediately about such transfer:
>>
>> Provided that the transfer of an application pursuant to this sub-section
>> shall be made as soon as practicable but in no case later than five days
>> from the date of receipt of the application.
>>
>> Now look at the highlighted portion and you will realise that the DoPT is
>> just trying to exploit the use of singular in Sec 6(3). Isn't this against
>> the very spirit of the act? I am sure you will realise why this provision
>> is
>> per se important. How many of us really know the intricacies of the
>> functioning of govt departments to know which public authority exactly
>> holds
>> which kind of information? (The pity is that till date none, including the
>> information commissions, have published the info required to be published
>> under Sec 4 of the RTI Act!) And even in one public authority we all know
>> how the employees make you run from pillar to post to get just a simple
>> job
>> done. So it was really a very deliberate provision in the RTI Act to
>> prevent
>> the public servants from knowingly or unknowingly harassing the
>> information
>> seeker.
>>
>> One cannot overlook the fact that the applicant is seeking information
>> with
>> some definite purpose (though he doesn't have to disclose the purpose
>> officially!) and he will not be interested in a five year plan to compile
>> info from dozens of public authorities with just one application to one
>> public authority. So let us accept it that in general any PIO will have to
>> use this provision to send the application to 2 or in rare cases to 3 and
>> in
>> rarest of the rarest cases upto 5 other PIOs, which by no means can be
>> considered unreasonable.
>>
>> In this context, one has to also recollect two other issues- one the
>> motives
>> of the DoPT and two the attitude of the information commissioners.
>>
>> You may recollect that the DoPT had also tried to SUBVERT the RTI Act by
>> trying to argue that every complaint or appeal to the information
>> commission
>> has to be heard by all the information commissioners together! The
>> ridiculousness of the argument does strike one  immediately. The DoPT
>> ventured to make such a demand again because of the language used in Sec
>> 18
>> (1) which states that ' Subject to the provisions of this Act, it shall be
>> the duty of the Central Information Commission or State Information
>> Commission, as the case may be, to receive and inquire into a complaint
>> from
>> any person,—...' They want the Commission to be interpreted as the whole
>> lot
>> of commissioners sitting in one bench! Ridiculous on the face of it, isn't
>> it? Fortunately this has not been agreed to but the last I heard on this
>> issue was that the matter was being contested in Delhi High Court!
>>
>> The next issue I wanted to bring to your attention now is how the other
>> provisions, which favour the citizens, are not so intricately analysed and
>> implemented, even though there are absolutely no ambiguities in them.
>>
>> The first case is of Sec 5(2), dealing with appointment of APIOs. It reads
>> as
>> ' Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1) (dealing with
>> appointment of PIOs), every public authority shall designate an officer,
>> within one hundred days of the enactment of this Act, at each
>> sub-divisional
>> level or other sub-district level as a Central Assistant Public
>> Information
>> Officer or a State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may
>> be,
>> to receive the applications for information or appeals under this Act for
>> forwarding the same forthwith to the Central Public Information Officer or
>> the State Public Information Officer or senior officer specified under
>> sub-section (1) of section 19 or the Central Information Commission or the
>> State Information Commission, as the case may be:..'
>>
>> Now again this a very important provision in favour of the citizen. The
>> task
>> of the APIOs is very clear- that is to accept applications (including, of
>> course, the fees prescribed) and appeals meant for other public
>> authorities
>> and forward them to the concerned PIOs/FAAs or ICs. The purpose is also
>> obvious, that is to help the citizens access info without running from
>> pillar to post, with the added advantage of saving on postal charges with
>> the assured accountability for delivering the document correctly! But it
>> is
>> the interpretation of the sub divisional level that is being misused to
>> deny
>> the citizens their right under this Act. Now what does 'every public
>> authority shall designate... at each sub divisional level' mean? It needs
>> to
>> be analysed as follows.
>>
>> A village office is also a public authority. Can it designate an APIO at
>> any
>> sub divisional level? Definitely NO! So the clause actually becomes 'every
>> public authority at sub divisional level shall designate an APIO...'
>>
>> Now does the clause restrict the task of the APIO to accepting
>> applications/appeals only for the PIOs of the same department/ autonomous
>> body? Again NO! In fact the liberal (if it should be considered so) and
>> correct interpretation would mean that an APIO at any sub divisional level
>> public authority can accept an application or 1st appeal to any other
>> public
>> authority (irrespective of the distinction between state and centre!) or
>> any
>> 2nd appeal to any IC!
>>
>> But what do you find in practice? While the SICs themselves have not
>> designated any APIOs at any subdivisional level (for obvious reasons) they
>> have wrongly interpreted the task of the APIOs in restricting them to
>> accepting applications and1st appeals pertaining to their own
>> departments/autonomous bodies only. ( The Kerala SIC had gone one step
>> further and even written an illegal letter to the PIO of the office of the
>> RDO, Palakkad not to accept any applications or appeals, contravening even
>> the RTI Rules promulgated by the Govt of Kerala and in force then. That
>> the
>> Govt of Kerala has itself has been subverting the letter and spirit of the
>> law by amending the rules is another cause for concern. But those details
>> later.) As far as the central public authorities are concerned, for some
>> of
>> them, the APIOs at designated Head Post Offices have been tasked to accept
>> applications and appeals meant for them. But this is a far cry from the
>> actual provision in Sec 5 (2)!
>>
>> The next important subversion is of Sec 20(1) regarding imposition of
>> penalty. It reads as ' Where the Central Information Commission or the
>> State
>> Information Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any
>> complaint or appeal is of the opinion that the Central Public Information
>> Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has,
>> without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for
>> information or has not furnished information within the time specified
>> under
>> sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for
>> information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading
>> information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request
>> or
>> obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it shall impose a
>> penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each day till application is
>> received or information is furnished, so however, the total amount of such
>> penalty shall not exceed twenty-five thousand rupees:...'
>>
>> Here the important thing to note is that the imposition of penalty is
>> mandatory even if there has been only delay in providing the information.
>> The delay is an obvious fact and there cannot be an opinion whether there
>> has been any delay or not. The opinion can be only about the validity of
>> the
>> reasons for the delay.  You may try and recollect now in how many cases
>> the
>> mandatory penalty have been imposed in your own appeals and what were the
>> valid reasons for the delay in other cases.
>>
>> I hope I have elaborated enough to drive home the point that this letter
>> from the DoPT is yet another act of subversion of the law and the CIC is
>> an
>> accomplice!
>>
>> Yours truly
>>
>> P M Ravindran
>> 2/18, 'Aathira'
>> Kalpathy-678003
>> Tel: 0491-2576042
>>
>> http://raviforjustice.blogspot.com
>> 'Judiciary Watch' at www.vigilonline.com
>> http://www.judicialreforms.org/
>> http://www.roguepolice.com
>> http://milapchoraria.tripod.com
>>
>>
>


--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
989, Sector 15-A, Opposite bishnoi Colony, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

Re: [HumJanenge] Urgent Mail.

Dear Sahil,

I agree with you.
We must have an opinion poll on the subject and move further.

regards 

Col Thakur singh
9873379995

On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 2:40 PM, AFROZ ALAM SAHIL <afroz.alam.sahil@gmail.com> wrote:

To,                                                                                        

All RTI Activists of India.

 

Sub: Bring Media in to the purview of RTI act and Lokapl bill.

 

Right to Information Act 2005 is a milestone legislation in the recent history that is designed to bring transparency in our polity, society and economy to successfully check corruption. But resistance from the corrupt people in the higher authority is making it difficult for effective implementation.

 

Referring to the RTI Act, Union Minister Mr. AK Antony reportedly said RTI will help the transparency revolution to percolate down to all walks of life. He said, "The RTI Act will spread to new areas. I think every facet of human life will be transparent." This is slowly happening in India under this act.

 

Nevertheless, we need to bring important institutions under the purview of this act. Media as an institution needs to be under the purview of the RTI act. There is and there will be resistance from media houses on this but in the largest interest we need to move in this direction. 

 

Besides the ideological and political inclinations and affiliations media has, over the years, it has become more and more powerful with developing business interest. It has become an industry that is engaged in making profit. In short its turning into a business of what Noam Chomsky said "manufacturing consent" most of the time ending in creating perceptions which may or may not be right.

 

The demand to bring Media under RTI assumes more significance when our leading journalists and channel heads are found brokering with the political parties and determining the fate of Cabinet Ministers to benefit their advertisers or sponsors. The Nira Radia saga has been a classic example.

 

Recently, a channel head was found guilty of demanding salaries for their employees to a Public Relations Manager.

 

Paid news is another blot on our media that is subverting the democratic process. Media exposés have shown that several organizations have been selling news space to politicians at election time, disguising the advertisements as news. The Press Council of India has set up a committee to investigate violations of the journalistic code of fair and objective reporting.

 

Press council of India reported, "The phenomenon of "paid news" has acquired serious dimensions. Today it goes beyond the corruption of individual journalists and media companies and has become pervasive, structured and highly organized. In the process, it is undermining democracy in India."

 

Another dimension of how media is threatening our democracy is the use of public money in creating wrong perceptions. The Political parties, specially in the government are using public money to improve their government and parties' image which might be contrary to the fact.

 

Sometimes this Media Relation exercise by the governments ends up curbing public sentiments and doing injustice with people. Many of the owners, editors and other journalists appear to have wealth excessive of their known sources of income. It is thus imperative that they not only become transparent but also bring 'secrets' under RTI Act.

 

Since other three pillars of democracy, Legislature, Executive and Judiciary, are already under the purview. Corruption, like in other parts of life is affecting, media houses too in the name of paid news and Public Relation exercises. We therefore demand that media should fall under the ambit of RTI and it should also be included in the Lokpal bill.

 

With regards

 

Afroz Alam Sahil, (RTI Journalist)

M.Phil Researcher, Jamia Millia Islamia

Editor (Investigation)- www.beyondheadlines.in

 


--
AFROZ ALAM 'SAHIL'
Mobile:-+91-9891322178
 

 

GreenKFUPM  Save a tree. Don't print this e-mail unless it's really necessary

 


Re: [HumJanenge] Re: [rti4empowerment] Urgent Mail.

as per my opinion, if we can prove that the publishing of news is
public activity, then it is already under RTI act.
secondly if we have sufficient evidence that action of media is
subversive of law, then a complaint can be made to pti and the
ministry of information and broadcasting.

On 8/21/11, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Afroz
>
> Are you suggesting that the RTI Act be amended to permit this, if so then
> why stop at media ?
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 2:40 PM, AFROZ ALAM SAHIL <
> afroz.alam.sahil@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>>
>> To,
>>
>>
>> **
>>
>> *All RTI Activists of India.*
>>
>>
>>
>> *Sub: Bring Media in to the purview of RTI act and Lokapl bill.*
>>
>>
>>
>> Right to Information Act 2005 is a milestone legislation in the recent
>> history that is designed to bring transparency in our polity, society and
>> economy to successfully check corruption. But resistance from the corrupt
>> people in the higher authority is making it difficult for effective
>> implementation.
>>
>>
>>
>> Referring to the RTI Act, Union Minister Mr. AK Antony reportedly said RTI
>> will help the transparency revolution to percolate down to all walks of
>> life. He said, "The RTI Act will spread to new areas. I think every facet
>> of
>> human life will be transparent." This is slowly happening in India under
>> this act.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nevertheless, we need to bring important institutions under the purview of
>> this act. Media as an institution needs to be under the purview of the RTI
>> act. There is and there will be resistance from media houses on this but
>> in
>> the largest interest we need to move in this direction.
>>
>>
>>
>> Besides the ideological and political inclinations and affiliations media
>> has, over the years, it has become more and more powerful with developing
>> business interest. It has become an industry that is engaged in making
>> profit. In short its turning into a business of what Noam Chomsky said
>> "manufacturing consent" most of the time ending in creating perceptions
>> which may or may not be right.
>>
>>
>>
>> The demand to bring Media under RTI assumes more significance when our
>> leading journalists and channel heads are found brokering with the
>> political
>> parties and determining the fate of Cabinet Ministers to benefit their
>> advertisers or sponsors. The Nira Radia saga has been a classic example.
>>
>>
>>
>> Recently, a channel head was found guilty of demanding salaries for their
>> employees to a Public Relations Manager.
>>
>>
>>
>> Paid news is another blot on our media that is subverting the democratic
>> process. Media exposés have shown that several organizations have been
>> selling news space to politicians at election time, disguising the
>> advertisements as news. The Press Council of India has set up a committee
>> to
>> investigate violations of the journalistic code of fair and objective
>> reporting.
>>
>>
>>
>> Press council of India reported, "The phenomenon of "paid news" has
>> acquired serious dimensions. Today it goes beyond the corruption of
>> individual journalists and media companies and has become pervasive,
>> structured and highly organized. In the process, it is undermining
>> democracy
>> in India."
>>
>>
>>
>> Another dimension of how media is threatening our democracy is the use of
>> public money in creating wrong perceptions. The Political parties,
>> specially
>> in the government are using public money to improve their government and
>> parties' image which might be contrary to the fact.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sometimes this Media Relation exercise by the governments ends up curbing
>> public sentiments and doing injustice with people. Many of the owners,
>> editors and other journalists appear to have wealth excessive of their
>> known
>> sources of income. It is thus imperative that they not only become
>> transparent but also bring 'secrets' under RTI Act.
>>
>>
>>
>> Since other three pillars of democracy, Legislature, Executive and
>> Judiciary, are already under the purview. Corruption, like in other parts
>> of
>> life is affecting, media houses too in the name of paid news and Public
>> Relation exercises. We therefore demand that media should fall under the
>> ambit of RTI and it should also be included in the Lokpal bill.
>>
>>
>>
>> With regards
>>
>>
>>
>> *Afroz Alam Sahil,* (RTI Journalist)
>>
>> M.Phil Researcher, Jamia Millia Islamia
>>
>> Editor (Investigation)- www.beyondheadlines.in
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> AFROZ ALAM 'SAHIL'
>> Mobile:-+91-9891322178
>> Blog: http://suchnaexpress.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: GreenKFUPM] *Save a tree. Don't print this e-mail unless it's
>> really necessary*
>>
>>
>> __._,_.___
>> Reply to
>> sender<afroz.alam.sahil@gmail.com?subject=Re%3A%20Urgent%20Mail%2E>| Reply
>> to
>> group<rti4empowerment@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20Urgent%20Mail%2E>|
>> Reply
>> via web
>> post<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti4empowerment/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxbG1iOTcyBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxODg3MDQ0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTQ0NDUyNQRtc2dJZAM5MzkzBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTMxMzgzMTQxNQ--?act=reply&messageNum=9393>|
>> Start
>> a New
>> Topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti4empowerment/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJmZTlwZjViBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxODg3MDQ0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTQ0NDUyNQRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNudHBjBHN0aW1lAzEzMTM4MzE0MTU->
>> Messages in this
>> topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti4empowerment/message/9393;_ylc=X3oDMTM1YWc4bTQyBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxODg3MDQ0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTQ0NDUyNQRtc2dJZAM5MzkzBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTMxMzgzMTQxNQR0cGNJZAM5Mzkz>(
>> 1)
>> Recent Activity:
>>
>>
>> Visit Your
>> Group<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti4empowerment;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaGVza3BxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIxODg3MDQ0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTQ0NDUyNQRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzEzMTM4MzE0MTU->
>> [image: Yahoo!
>> Groups]<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlZ281MWdqBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIxODg3MDQ0BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTQ0NDUyNQRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTMxMzgzMTQxNQ-->
>> Switch to:
>> Text-Only<rti4empowerment-traditional@yahoogroups.com?subject=Change+Delivery+Format:+Traditional>,
>> Daily
>> Digest<rti4empowerment-digest@yahoogroups.com?subject=Email+Delivery:+Digest>•
>> Unsubscribe<rti4empowerment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>•
>> Terms
>> of Use <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
>> .
>>
>> __,_._,___
>>
>


--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
989, Sector 15-A, Opposite bishnoi Colony, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

Re: [HumJanenge] Urgent Mail.

I fully agree to the suggestion and support it. Thanks.
 
FB Virani 

From: AFROZ ALAM SAHIL <afroz.alam.sahil@gmail.com>
To: rti4empowerment@yahoogroups.com; HumJanenge <HumJanenge@yahoogroups.co.in>; nrindians@googlegroups.com; humjanenge@googlegroups.com; sadiq naqvi <naqvi.sadiq@gmail.com>; irfan khan <rtirti.khan@gmail.com>; IZHAR AHMAD <rti.lucknow@rediffmail.com>; National RTI Forum <nationalrtiforum@gmail.com>; rti amita <isst_field_office@yahoo.co.in>; urvashi sharma <rtimahilamanchup@yahoo.co.in>; rti-times@lists.riseup.net; rti4ngo@yahoogroups.com; rti@ndtv.com; rti_india@yahoogroups.com; rtiap2005@gmail.com; rtimahilamanchup@yahoogroups.co.in; rtiwaari@gmail.com; "RTI Manch, Jaipur" <rtiraj@gmail.com>; Editor RTI Activist <editor@rtiactivist.com>; humanrightrevolution@yahoo.co.in; Humanrightsactivist Yahoogroups <humanrightsactivist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2011 2:40 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Urgent Mail.


To,                                                                                        
All RTI Activists of India.
 
Sub: Bring Media in to the purview of RTI act and Lokapl bill.
 
Right to Information Act 2005 is a milestone legislation in the recent history that is designed to bring transparency in our polity, society and economy to successfully check corruption. But resistance from the corrupt people in the higher authority is making it difficult for effective implementation.
 
Referring to the RTI Act, Union Minister Mr. AK Antony reportedly said RTI will help the transparency revolution to percolate down to all walks of life. He said, "The RTI Act will spread to new areas. I think every facet of human life will be transparent." This is slowly happening in India under this act.
 
Nevertheless, we need to bring important institutions under the purview of this act. Media as an institution needs to be under the purview of the RTI act. There is and there will be resistance from media houses on this but in the largest interest we need to move in this direction. 
 
Besides the ideological and political inclinations and affiliations media has, over the years, it has become more and more powerful with developing business interest. It has become an industry that is engaged in making profit. In short its turning into a business of what Noam Chomsky said "manufacturing consent" most of the time ending in creating perceptions which may or may not be right.
 
The demand to bring Media under RTI assumes more significance when our leading journalists and channel heads are found brokering with the political parties and determining the fate of Cabinet Ministers to benefit their advertisers or sponsors. The Nira Radia saga has been a classic example.
 
Recently, a channel head was found guilty of demanding salaries for their employees to a Public Relations Manager.
 
Paid news is another blot on our media that is subverting the democratic process. Media exposés have shown that several organizations have been selling news space to politicians at election time, disguising the advertisements as news. The Press Council of India has set up a committee to investigate violations of the journalistic code of fair and objective reporting.
 
Press council of India reported, "The phenomenon of "paid news" has acquired serious dimensions. Today it goes beyond the corruption of individual journalists and media companies and has become pervasive, structured and highly organized. In the process, it is undermining democracy in India."
 
Another dimension of how media is threatening our democracy is the use of public money in creating wrong perceptions. The Political parties, specially in the government are using public money to improve their government and parties' image which might be contrary to the fact.
 
Sometimes this Media Relation exercise by the governments ends up curbing public sentiments and doing injustice with people. Many of the owners, editors and other journalists appear to have wealth excessive of their known sources of income. It is thus imperative that they not only become transparent but also bring 'secrets' under RTI Act.
 
Since other three pillars of democracy, Legislature, Executive and Judiciary, are already under the purview. Corruption, like in other parts of life is affecting, media houses too in the name of paid news and Public Relation exercises. We therefore demand that media should fall under the ambit of RTI and it should also be included in the Lokpal bill.
 
With regards
 
Afroz Alam Sahil, (RTI Journalist)
M.Phil Researcher, Jamia Millia Islamia
Editor (Investigation)- www.beyondheadlines.in
 

--
AFROZ ALAM 'SAHIL'
Mobile:-+91-9891322178
 
 
GreenKFUPM  Save a tree. Don't print this e-mail unless it's really necessary
 


Re: [HumJanenge] Re: [rti4empowerment] Urgent Mail.

Agree with sarbajitji, we do need to use our own discretion in some matters as media covers entertainment also. We can easily identify a barkha dutt and as they say cameras don't lie.

On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 3:27 AM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Afroz

Are you suggesting that the RTI Act be amended to permit this, if so then why stop at media ?

Sarbajit

On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 2:40 PM, AFROZ ALAM SAHIL <afroz.alam.sahil@gmail.com> wrote:
 


To,                                                                                        

All RTI Activists of India.

 

Sub: Bring Media in to the purview of RTI act and Lokapl bill.

 

Right to Information Act 2005 is a milestone legislation in the recent history that is designed to bring transparency in our polity, society and economy to successfully check corruption. But resistance from the corrupt people in the higher authority is making it difficult for effective implementation.

 

Referring to the RTI Act, Union Minister Mr. AK Antony reportedly said RTI will help the transparency revolution to percolate down to all walks of life. He said, "The RTI Act will spread to new areas. I think every facet of human life will be transparent." This is slowly happening in India under this act.

 

Nevertheless, we need to bring important institutions under the purview of this act. Media as an institution needs to be under the purview of the RTI act. There is and there will be resistance from media houses on this but in the largest interest we need to move in this direction. 

 

Besides the ideological and political inclinations and affiliations media has, over the years, it has become more and more powerful with developing business interest. It has become an industry that is engaged in making profit. In short its turning into a business of what Noam Chomsky said "manufacturing consent" most of the time ending in creating perceptions which may or may not be right.

 

The demand to bring Media under RTI assumes more significance when our leading journalists and channel heads are found brokering with the political parties and determining the fate of Cabinet Ministers to benefit their advertisers or sponsors. The Nira Radia saga has been a classic example.

 

Recently, a channel head was found guilty of demanding salaries for their employees to a Public Relations Manager.

 

Paid news is another blot on our media that is subverting the democratic process. Media exposés have shown that several organizations have been selling news space to politicians at election time, disguising the advertisements as news. The Press Council of India has set up a committee to investigate violations of the journalistic code of fair and objective reporting.

 

Press council of India reported, "The phenomenon of "paid news" has acquired serious dimensions. Today it goes beyond the corruption of individual journalists and media companies and has become pervasive, structured and highly organized. In the process, it is undermining democracy in India."

 

Another dimension of how media is threatening our democracy is the use of public money in creating wrong perceptions. The Political parties, specially in the government are using public money to improve their government and parties' image which might be contrary to the fact.

 

Sometimes this Media Relation exercise by the governments ends up curbing public sentiments and doing injustice with people. Many of the owners, editors and other journalists appear to have wealth excessive of their known sources of income. It is thus imperative that they not only become transparent but also bring 'secrets' under RTI Act.

 

Since other three pillars of democracy, Legislature, Executive and Judiciary, are already under the purview. Corruption, like in other parts of life is affecting, media houses too in the name of paid news and Public Relation exercises. We therefore demand that media should fall under the ambit of RTI and it should also be included in the Lokpal bill.

 

With regards

 

Afroz Alam Sahil, (RTI Journalist)

M.Phil Researcher, Jamia Millia Islamia

Editor (Investigation)- www.beyondheadlines.in

 


--
AFROZ ALAM 'SAHIL'
Mobile:-+91-9891322178
 

 

GreenKFUPM  Save a tree. Don't print this e-mail unless it's really necessary

 

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___


Re: [HumJanenge] Homage to Shehlaji Masood

We must follow the CBI inquiry and ensure that the coward or cowards, who have committed this barbaric act are brought to justice.
Nature's Justice will take its course as nothing can stop that.


On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 5:08 PM, neeraj gupta <rashtra.rakshak@gmail.com> wrote:
May her soul rest in peace and her sacrifice becomes a beacon to others of the same path.
Neeraj

On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Ketan Modi <modiketan@rediffmail.com> wrote:

Friends,
One more crusader martyred for being an RTI Worker in MP. Shahelji
Masood, a wildlife and RTI worker who had filed over 40 applications
inculpating police and forest officer has been shot dead by
unidentified persons (read poachers) as she was heading to join
Annaji's agitation in Bhopal. Ever since citizens' have taken to RTI,
intolerant elements of the society who are damaging our resources for
petty pecuniary gains, are hitting back at us. My heart goes out for
Shahelaji about whom I had learnt for the first time yesterday
afternoon when I was drafting my letter addressed to the
parliamentarians who deserves to be looked at with contempt they
deserve. I bow my head in respect for a sister whose supreme sacrifice
is greater than our so called leaders activities in the parliament and
other public bodies. I pray God that strength be reposed in the
departed soul's family members and others who knew her to bear the
losses with courage. I pray Allah that she be honoured with the highest
Zannat that she deserves. Many of us are facing similar music and I
exhort all friends to join me in this homage to the great martyr.
Regards
ketan Modi

Treat yourself at a restaurant, spa, resort and much more with Rediff Deal ho jaye!


Re: [HumJanenge] FW: Joint Statement on Martyrdom of Shehla Masood (for your endorsement)

Dear Mr. Gopal Krishna,

I endorse the joint statement on Martyrdom of Shehla Masood.

Cdr PS Nath
Member IESM
Hyderabad
ps_nath@yahoo.com


From: Nandita Shah <shahnandi@gmail.com>
To: Federation of Animal Protection Organisations <fiapo@googlegroups.com>; humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2011 11:38 AM
Subject: [HumJanenge] FW: Joint Statement on Martyrdom of Shehla Masood (for your endorsement)

Send your endorsement to  <krishnagreen@gmail.com>
Apologies if you have already seen this


From: Gopal Krishna <krishnagreen@gmail.com>
Reply-To: <punjabeco-crisis@googlegroups.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:59:51 +0530
To: krishna2777 <krishna2777@gmail.com>
Subject: Joint Statement on Martyrdom of Shehla Masood (for your endorsement)

Please send your endorsements with name, organisational or professional affiliation, place and email address by 22nd August 2 O' clock. We will send this statement to the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs and Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs with copy to Union Environment Minister in the evening of 22nd August. You may circulate this message for endorsement.

Joint Statement on Martyrdom of Shehla Masood (for your endorsement)

16 August, 2011

"I am proud to be an Indian.Happy Independence Day."
                                                                             Shehla Masood, 15 August, 2011

Gandhi "the purpose of civil resistance is provocation". Anna has succeeded in provoking the Govt and the Opposition. Hope he wins us freedom from corruption. Meet at 2 pm Boat Club Bhopal" 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                Shehla Masood16 August, 2011 few minutes before her martyrdom  

Shehla Masood, a Madhya Pradesh based civil rights and environmental rights activist was was shot dead  by an unidentified person in front of her residence in Koh-e-Fiza locality in Bhopal around 11 AM on 16th August, 2011.

We the undersigned aghast at the irony that tigers, tribals, trees and civil rights and environmental rights activists are being hunted and killed in the same manner.

We demand that the possible connection between her murder and her raising the issue of illegal Diamond mining project in Chhattarpur district, Madhya Pradesh by Rio Tinto, a transnational mining company headquartered in the UK, combining Rio Tinto plc, a London and NYSE listed company, and Rio Tinto Limited, which is listed on the Australian Securities Exchange must be investigated along with other suspicions by a high level probe team. (Factsheet on Rio Tinto's illegal mining activity attached)   

She was active to save the watershed of the Panna Tiger Reserve and the Shyamri River, one of the cleanest in the country from Rio Tinto's mining activity along with other activists.

We suspect that the considered timing of her elimination during the ongoing anti-corruption campaign when she was on her way to support Anna Hazare's fast is meant to overshadow the issue of illegal Diamond mining project in Chhattarpur district, Madhya Pradesh by Rio Tinto and the political Mafiosi.

The mining block is inside a forest which is the northernmost tip of the best corridor of teak forests south of the Gangetic plain. It is an established law that mining is non-forestry activity. There is an immediate need for a probe to determine who allowed the mining to take place in such an ecologically fragile area.

The Bunder mine project, near the city of Chhatarpur in Madhya Pradesh, about 500 kilometres south-east of Delhi, is likely to be one of the largest diamond reserves in the world. It is estimated that there is a ''inferred resource'' of 27.4 million carats, a diamonds resource seven times richer than the Panna mine, country's only working diamond mine.

A statement dated March 22, 2011 was laid in the Parliament (Lok Sabha) on "need to review the diamond mining project in district Chhattarpur, Madhya Pradesh posing serious threat to environment in the region". 

We have learnt from senior journalists that two Collectors have been transferred to facilitate the ongoing illegal mining and the fact that the new Collector has allowed mining which came to light when a PIL was filed stating that Rio Tinto has been carrying on exploitation of mineral resources in Chattarpur district violating the prescribed  provisions.

Prior to the statement in the Lok Sabha, on March 10, 2011, the FOREST ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING of Ministry of Environment & Forests listed Agenda no. 6 on " Prospecting of diamond at 143 additional locations in 2329.75 ha. forest land located in 18 compartments in Buxwaha Range in Chhatarpur district of Madhya Pradesh by M/s Rio Tinto Exploration India Private Limited. [File No. 8-49/2006-FC-(Vol.)]" to discuss it but did not do so stating, "Due to paucity of time the proposal could not be discussed during the meeting".

We had written to the Union Environment Minister and Parliamentary Petitions Committee separately drawing its attention towards Madhya Pradesh High Court's notices to the Centre and the state government on illegal mining of diamonds by international mining companies. The court had asked both the governments to reply in this matter within four weeks. Considering the act of illegal mining as a serious offence, a double bench of Chief Justice Sayed Rafat Alam and Justice Sushil Harkauli criticised the Forest Departments, Mining Secretaries of the state as well as the Centre and issued notices against them in addition to the Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board and Chattarpur Collector.

We take cognisance of the fact that Corporate Watch, a London based group had chosen Rio Tinto to award it for its display of heinous, misguided, and altogether anti-social behaviour over the last ten years in 2010.

We take note of 'Rio Tinto: the Tainted Titan,' the Stakeholders Report, www.cfmeu.asn.au, 1997, which states "It's (Rio Tinto's) activities in some of the wildest and the most pristine places in the world and their impact on the environment of those places, the people who live there, the life-style of the indigenous people and also its corporate culture, are subjects of real concern."

We submit that Rio Tinto project is threatening unique forest resources in the area affected by the mine in Chhattarpur, MP. In this context, it may be noted that Roger Moody, a veteran journalist in his book Plunder, describes Rio Tinto's activities as ranging from "brow-beating opponents, leaning on governments and price-fixing, to violating international law, union-busting and management of one of the world's biggest commodity cartels". His book outlines numerous examples of its environmental irresponsibility.

It is germane to recollect what Sir Roderick Carnegie, as Chairman Rio Tinto-Zinc (RTZ) had said at its 1984 shareholders' meeting: "The right to land depends on the ability to defend it". 

We salute the struggle and martyrdom of Shehla Masood who defended our forests, rivers, land and wildlife in the face of unscrupulous corporate assault in nexus with ruling political regimes.  

Shehla Masood used to conclude her messages with a proud "Roarrrrr" that cannot be silenced by the bullets of her assailants. 
   
Signatories

Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), New Delhi (krishna2777@gmail.com)
Prakash K Ray, Jawaharlal Nehru University Researchers Association (JNURA), New Delhi (pkray11@gmail.com)  
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "punjabeco-crisis - Kheti Virasat Mission" group.
To post to this group, send email to punjabeco-crisis@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to punjabeco-crisis+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/punjabeco-crisis?hl=en.


[HumJanenge] Re: subversion of the rti act

To:
Mr P M Ravindran

I do not know why I am repeatedly receiving such rude, scandalous and
ill conceived emails from you. Kindly stop sending me such emails. I
particularly object to phrases in your emails which betray disrespect
for the Constitution of India and its offices. I am given to
understand that you are an ex-serviceman, and I opine that stoppage of
your pension and other post-retirement benefits would be a fitting
penalty for your disrespect, and I sincerely hope that Madam
President, to whom you have addressed your offensive email, takes
swift and appropriate action.

Sarbajit Roy

On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Ravindran P M <pmravindran@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ms Pratibha Devi Singh Patil, President of India,
>
> Firstly, please note that I am not endorsing copy of this e mail to the PM
> because I am amoung those who believe that the earlier the present incumbent
> is kicked out of that office the better it will be for the country.
>
> Next, I am writing this to you to bring to your attention the blatant
> subversion of the RTI Act by the public servants of whom you are the
> executive head and is responsible to set the wrongs right.
>
> Please see the DoPT OM No F/10/02/2008-IR dated 24 Sep 2010 in the document
> attached.
>
> Now, your attention is invited to Sec 6 of the RTI Act which is reproduced
> for your study:
>
> 6     (1)  A person, who desires to obtain any information under this Act,
> shall make a request in writing or through electronic means in English or
> Hindi or in the official language of the area in which the application is
> being made, accompanying such fee as may be prescribed, to—
>             (a)     the Central Public Information Officer or State Public
> Information Officer, as the case may be, of the concerned public authority;
>             (b)     the Central Assistant Public Information Officer or
> State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be,
>
> specifying the particulars of the information sought by him or her:
>
> Provided that where such request cannot be made in writing, the Central
> Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case
> may be, shall render all reasonable assistance to the person making the
> request orally to reduce the same in writing.
>       (2)
>
> An applicant making request for information shall not be required to give
> any reason for requesting the information or any other personal details
> except those that may be necessary for contacting him.
>       (3)           Where an application is made to a public authority
> requesting for an information,—
>             (i)     which is held by another public authority; or
>             (ii)     the subject matter of which is more closely connected
> with the functions of another public authority,
>
> the public authority, to which such application is made, shall transfer the
> application or such part of it as may be appropriate to that other public
> authority and inform the applicant immediately about such transfer:
>
> Provided that the transfer of an application pursuant to this sub-section
> shall be made as soon as practicable but in no case later than five days
> from the date of receipt of the application.
>
> Now look at the highlighted portion and you will realise that the DoPT is
> just trying to exploit the use of singular in Sec 6(3). Isn't this against
> the very spirit of the act? I am sure you will realise why this provision is
> per se important. How many of us really know the intricacies of the
> functioning of govt departments to know which public authority exactly holds
> which kind of information? (The pity is that till date none, including the
> information commissions, have published the info required to be published
> under Sec 4 of the RTI Act!) And even in one public authority we all know
> how the employees make you run from pillar to post to get just a simple job
> done. So it was really a very deliberate provision in the RTI Act to prevent
> the public servants from knowingly or unknowingly harassing the information
> seeker.
>
> One cannot overlook the fact that the applicant is seeking information with
> some definite purpose (though he doesn't have to disclose the purpose
> officially!) and he will not be interested in a five year plan to compile
> info from dozens of public authorities with just one application to one
> public authority. So let us accept it that in general any PIO will have to
> use this provision to send the application to 2 or in rare cases to 3 and in
> rarest of the rarest cases upto 5 other PIOs, which by no means can be
> considered unreasonable.
>
> In this context, one has to also recollect two other issues- one the motives
> of the DoPT and two the attitude of the information commissioners.
>
> You may recollect that the DoPT had also tried to SUBVERT the RTI Act by
> trying to argue that every complaint or appeal to the information commission
> has to be heard by all the information commissioners together! The
> ridiculousness of the argument does strike one  immediately. The DoPT
> ventured to make such a demand again because of the language used in Sec 18
> (1) which states that ' Subject to the provisions of this Act, it shall be
> the duty of the Central Information Commission or State Information
> Commission, as the case may be, to receive and inquire into a complaint from
> any person,—...' They want the Commission to be interpreted as the whole lot
> of commissioners sitting in one bench! Ridiculous on the face of it, isn't
> it? Fortunately this has not been agreed to but the last I heard on this
> issue was that the matter was being contested in Delhi High Court!
>
> The next issue I wanted to bring to your attention now is how the other
> provisions, which favour the citizens, are not so intricately analysed and
> implemented, even though there are absolutely no ambiguities in them.
>
> The first case is of Sec 5(2), dealing with appointment of APIOs. It reads
> as
> ' Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1) (dealing with
> appointment of PIOs), every public authority shall designate an officer,
> within one hundred days of the enactment of this Act, at each sub-divisional
> level or other sub-district level as a Central Assistant Public Information
> Officer or a State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be,
> to receive the applications for information or appeals under this Act for
> forwarding the same forthwith to the Central Public Information Officer or
> the State Public Information Officer or senior officer specified under
> sub-section (1) of section 19 or the Central Information Commission or the
> State Information Commission, as the case may be:..'
>
> Now again this a very important provision in favour of the citizen. The task
> of the APIOs is very clear- that is to accept applications (including, of
> course, the fees prescribed) and appeals meant for other public authorities
> and forward them to the concerned PIOs/FAAs or ICs. The purpose is also
> obvious, that is to help the citizens access info without running from
> pillar to post, with the added advantage of saving on postal charges with
> the assured accountability for delivering the document correctly! But it is
> the interpretation of the sub divisional level that is being misused to deny
> the citizens their right under this Act. Now what does 'every public
> authority shall designate... at each sub divisional level' mean? It needs to
> be analysed as follows.
>
> A village office is also a public authority. Can it designate an APIO at any
> sub divisional level? Definitely NO! So the clause actually becomes 'every
> public authority at sub divisional level shall designate an APIO...'
>
> Now does the clause restrict the task of the APIO to accepting
> applications/appeals only for the PIOs of the same department/ autonomous
> body? Again NO! In fact the liberal (if it should be considered so) and
> correct interpretation would mean that an APIO at any sub divisional level
> public authority can accept an application or 1st appeal to any other public
> authority (irrespective of the distinction between state and centre!) or any
> 2nd appeal to any IC!
>
> But what do you find in practice? While the SICs themselves have not
> designated any APIOs at any subdivisional level (for obvious reasons) they
> have wrongly interpreted the task of the APIOs in restricting them to
> accepting applications and1st appeals pertaining to their own
> departments/autonomous bodies only. ( The Kerala SIC had gone one step
> further and even written an illegal letter to the PIO of the office of the
> RDO, Palakkad not to accept any applications or appeals, contravening even
> the RTI Rules promulgated by the Govt of Kerala and in force then. That the
> Govt of Kerala has itself has been subverting the letter and spirit of the
> law by amending the rules is another cause for concern. But those details
> later.) As far as the central public authorities are concerned, for some of
> them, the APIOs at designated Head Post Offices have been tasked to accept
> applications and appeals meant for them. But this is a far cry from the
> actual provision in Sec 5 (2)!
>
> The next important subversion is of Sec 20(1) regarding imposition of
> penalty. It reads as ' Where the Central Information Commission or the State
> Information Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any
> complaint or appeal is of the opinion that the Central Public Information
> Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has,
> without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for
> information or has not furnished information within the time specified under
> sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for
> information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading
> information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request or
> obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it shall impose a
> penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each day till application is
> received or information is furnished, so however, the total amount of such
> penalty shall not exceed twenty-five thousand rupees:...'
>
> Here the important thing to note is that the imposition of penalty is
> mandatory even if there has been only delay in providing the information.
> The delay is an obvious fact and there cannot be an opinion whether there
> has been any delay or not. The opinion can be only about the validity of the
> reasons for the delay.  You may try and recollect now in how many cases the
> mandatory penalty have been imposed in your own appeals and what were the
> valid reasons for the delay in other cases.
>
> I hope I have elaborated enough to drive home the point that this letter
> from the DoPT is yet another act of subversion of the law and the CIC is an
> accomplice!
>
> Yours truly
>
> P M Ravindran
> 2/18, 'Aathira'
> Kalpathy-678003
> Tel: 0491-2576042
>
> http://raviforjustice.blogspot.com
> 'Judiciary Watch' at www.vigilonline.com
> http://www.judicialreforms.org/
> http://www.roguepolice.com
> http://milapchoraria.tripod.com
>
>