C'da, > Note how the 'progressive, reform minded, etc. etc.' NDA left the gaping > loophole in their version of this law earlier.
The last govt. had left gaping loopholes, the new closes them. A future govt. will once again visit this and plug other loopholes, and that is how democracy functions. Do you think if we had this bill before, the NE large scale scams would have come to light? Or even with this bill, it wouldn't have made an iota of difference in those scams? --Ram On 5/21/05, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Editorial from the AT: The highlighting is mine: > > Note how the 'progressive, reform minded, etc. etc.' NDA left the gaping > loophole in their version of this law earlier. > > But is anyone willing to take a bet yet that this one is going to make a > difference? > > cm > > > Empowering peopleInformation is indispensable for the functioning of a > democracy. In fact, the very concept of democracy sounds hollow in the > absence of the right to information. The people of the country are not only > entitled to know how public money is spent, but also every act of the > representatives whom they put in the saddle of power. Unfortunately in > India, for well over five decades since Independence, lack of transparency > in public dealings has been so widespread and deep-rooted that the common > citizens usually cannot have a clear idea about what goes on behind the > thick veil of secrecy. Due to a secretive bureaucratic system, dishonest > politicians and bureaucrats, at all levels of public functioning, have > succeeded in institutionalizing the concealment of facts, resulting in > all-pervading corruption and lopsided development in India. This is what > makes the passing of the Right to Information Bill 2004 in the Lok Sabha > last week an epoch-making event in the history of Indian polity. It promises > to shift the power to the people, the ultimate sovereigns of the country. > The Bill, drafted by the National Advisory Council of India, provides for > setting up a practical regime of right to access information under the > control of public authorities. It paves the way for establishment of an > appellate machinery with investigative powers to review decisions of public > information officers; maximum disclosure of information along with minimum > exemptions; and has strict penal provisions for failure to provide > information as per law. The independent appeal mechanism, which the new Bill > seeks to set up in the form of a Central Information Commission, would spare > the people the impractical task of appealing to the government through writ > petitions to the High Courts or the Supreme Court. The previous Bill - the > Freedom of Information Act, 2002 - had provisions for exemptions from > disclosure of information, with no penalty provisions for willful > non-disclosure of information, or faulty disclosure of the same, by a public > authority. The new Bill has plugged all these loopholes present in the > previous Act, with the promise to make it "more progressive, participatory > and meaningful". But there exist some areas in the new Bill that may still > lead to corruption and deceit. Although the new Bill has strong penalty > provisions for failure to provide information or suppression of facts, it > provides government agencies the right to challenge the petitions to be > filed in the event of non-availability of information, thus retaining an > outside chance for corruption and conspiracy to conceal information. > Yet, the Right to Information Bill 2004, while fulfilling a long-felt need, > promises to bring in a fair amount of transparency in the functioning of the > government and its agencies. Kudos to public activists like Anna Hazare and > all the civil society groups but for whose relentless campaigns the > legislation would have remained on paper for far too long. The Central > government too has fulfilled one major point of its Common Minimum > Programme, despite the apparent stonewalling by the bureaucrats who had > ostensibly tried to prevent the Bill from getting passed in Parliament, the > Bill that would compel them to comply with the law. Hopefully, the new > legislation will empower people against the state machinery, ensure better > governance, lead to openness, accountability and integrity in the country, > and strengthen grassroots democracy - in the truest sense. Whether the long > red tape would eventually vanish and the welfare schemes reach the right > beneficiaries, the coming days will tell. > _______________________________________________ > Assam mailing list > Assam@pikespeak.uccs.edu > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam > > Mailing list FAQ: > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html > To unsubscribe or change options: > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam > > > _______________________________________________ Assam mailing list Assam@pikespeak.uccs.edu http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam Mailing list FAQ: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html To unsubscribe or change options: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam
