An information commissioner of the Goa State Information Commission Juino De Souza in an interview with Shaikh Jamaluddin says that there has been a strong need for widespread public awareness in the state on the Right to Information Act.
Q: Has there been decline in the number of RTI cases filed with the Goa State Information Commission? In 2016, only 350 appeals and complaints were filed with the panel which came down to about 250 in 2017. Is RTI activism weakening in the state?
I don’t totally agree that the civil society’s enthusiasm for RTI has declined in Goa. It is only when the applicant is not satisfied with the information furnished by the public information officer and is further aggrieved with the order of the first appellant authority that he/she approaches the commission by way of either a second appeal or a complaint. I feel that PIOs are giving information and matters get resolved at the first appellate stage; and which is why the number of cases in the commission has come down. Also Goa is a small state, so one cannot expect filing of a large number of cases every year.
Q: What has been the disposal rate? How many cases have you disposed of since you joined the commission?
I joined the commission in January 2016 and till date I have individually disposed of more than 600 appeals, complaints and penalty cases.
Q: What is the reason for the high disposal rate?
…I don’t allow cases to drag on, and instead pronounce my decision one way or the other straightaway so as to finalise orders. When I took over, there were old pending cases where the appellant or complainant had expired. I have closed such cases by holding that proceedings abate on death of the person who is the original RTI applicant. Also there were numerous penalty cases against retired PIOs, and in all such cases I have held that it is not possible for the commission to enforce penalty or take disciplinary action against a retired PIO who is no longer in active government service. I have also disposed of several enquiry cases by taking a view that it is not possible for the commission to conduct an enquiry on a mere allegation of the complainant that the information furnished is incomplete, incorrect and misleading.
Q: Have any of your orders been challenged in the High Court?
Not to my knowledge. I passed justifiable speaking orders and none of my orders have been set aside by the High Court till date.
Q: Are PIOs discharging their duty as per the RTI Act?
The RTI Act states that a PIO on receipt of an application for information under Section 6 shall expedite the request within 30 days. However, there may be exceptions wherein the PIO is unable to do so in case the information sought is voluminous and not easily available, or that the PIO is occupied with other important office work, or has proceeded on leave and there is no a substitute PIO. This results in delay posing a major bottleneck in the implementation of the act.
Q: Do you hold the view that only the PIO should be held responsible for denying or delaying the information sought, and thus should be penalised?
The RTI Act holds the PIO responsible for furnishing information in a time-bound manner, and penalty and disciplinary action for delay or denying information can be applied only against the PIO. The head of the department, who is the first appellate authority, escapes punishment as the commission does not have power to penalise him/her. However, before a penalty is imposed, it is mandatory to issue a notice under Section 20 and the PIO is called upon to give an explanation. It depends on the commission whether to accept or reject it.
Q: What are the steps needed for the effective implementation of the Right to Information Act?
I feel that there has been low public awareness. It is necessary to develop and organise educational programmes to advance the understanding of the public, in particular of disadvantaged communities, as how to exercise the rights enshrined in this act. The public authorities must be encouraged to participate in such programmes. There must be regular training programmes for PIOs and the first appellate authority for an in-depth understanding of the RTI Act so that these authorities can discharge duties efficiently. Besides, there is an urgent need for proper dissemination of information through government websites, and also implementation of sections 4(1)(a) and 4(1)(b).
Q: What are the challenges you face while discharging duties?
The prime challenge is to ensure that the RTI Act brings about a paradigm shift in transparency, accountability and openness in government functioning. The other challenge is also to ensure that RTI Act is not allowed to be used to settle personal scores or to make a living. There has to be a dividing line.