This is not the first time that the state government has tried to play a spoil sport vis-a-vis RTI Act. Two of its latest notifications are only a continuation of its earlier attempts to restrict the use of the RTI Act or kill its spirit.

COMMERCIAL BREAK
SCROLL TO CONTINUE READING

While some have had to be withdrawn, others have stayed put. The first serious attempt was soon after the Act came into effect in 2006. The government moved to keep file noting outside RTI ambit. That saw a number of RTI activist protesting and the government beating a hasty retreat.

In January 2012, the state restricted the word limit and the subject matter of a RTI application. That was followed by a directive from the information commission on the building proposal department–withdrawn after public uproar–that information should not be provided.

The two recent notifications are now being slammed for mutually agreeable "skin-saving" measures by politicians and bureaucrats. While the circular on anti-corruption bureau (ACB) will save investigations on politicos from coming out in the open, the other saves government servants (mostly) from giving out information that partially needs to be provided.

"The problem is that the state does not have any opposition party. All politicians are trying to save one another. Bureaucrats are corrupt and they try save their skin. All the information for which people file RTI should actually be on the website. Through these notifications, they are trying to amend RTI Act through the back door," said Vihar Durve, an RTI activist.

In Sept, the government issued a notification removing ACB from RTI. In October, it put out another circular that stated personal information should not be given if a "public interest" is not proved.

"It's a badly-drafted notification that does not state anything which has already not been provided for in the Act. It being issued only puts question mark on the motive behind it. In fact, the Act states that no information can be denied if it cannot be denied to state legislature," said Vijay Kumbhar, an RTI activist.

Activist have now filed a complaint on the ACB notification and it's likely to come up for hearing next month.

"RTI Act is most widely used. It gave citizens self-respect and information that could be derived without compromising on their esteem. In the last nine years, it has been used exponentially. Maharashtra has had the distinction of having the most number of applications filed even though there has been little to no effort to create awareness on it. In accessing information, it has brought a lay man closer to an elected representative. The two notifications look to put the common man out of RTI ambit," added Prabhu.Agencies outside RTI AmbitState Intelligence and its branchesSpecial branches of all police commissioneratesAll districts and special branches of police superintendentsAnti Terrorist SquadForce One Squad.Attempts to make Act ineffectual/weakProposal to keep file noting out (later withdrawn)Setting word limit on applicationApplication on single subject matterLittle or no awareness on RTI despite orders from information commissions, challenging them in court.