 knowledge of person and the resource person of the states of Mr. Shailesh Gandhi. I believe that everybody would be gaining with the today's session. We have already shared the notes with him, shared the notes which he had shared with us in the different WhatsApp groups as well as on the Telegram. Similarly, he has also shared with us some PPTs in respect of the RTI which we will be sharing after the webinar is over. Today he will also be sharing those PPTs by the screen sharing in the today's webinar. On behalf of Beyond Law CLC, we are thank you to Mr. Gandhi who has been kind enough to share his vast practical and personal experience and it's a rare occasion where a person who has seen the both sides as while adorning and deciding as well as to how these could be used as for a common man also. Without taking much time, I would request Mr. Gandhi to explain all these three aspects. Yeah, thank you, sir, once again. Thank you very much Vikasji and thank you for inviting me to share my thoughts with this audience. I'm very grateful for this. Fellow citizens of India, we say that India is the world's largest democracy. When I was in school, I was taught that democracy is ruled off the people for the people by the people. But it does not appear to be true in India. Just give me 10 seconds. Sorry about that. Question is, is this rule of the people for the people by the people? If you go to any government office, does an average citizen feel that he or she is the ruler of this nation? The answer across the country is no. Then, how do we claim we are the world's largest democracy? Based on what? I would submit to you that we say we are the world's largest democracy because we have a recently fair system of elections by which we are able to change governments, change leaders, change our political representatives. Having a fair system of elections and a constitution are necessary conditions for a democracy but are not the complete set of conditions. The heart and essence of democracy is the concept that each individual citizen is a sovereign in her right and she gives a part of the sovereignty to the state in return for which she gets the rule of law. Sovereignty of the individual is the key to a democracy. Democracy is rule. The word is R-U-L-E rule of the people for the people by the people. In Hindi we use the word Lokshahi. Lokshahi can only have one meaning. You friends should feel like a bach Shah or Begum when you deal with the government. At one college when I was talking like this, one young student got up and challenged me and said Mr Gandhi, is it possible to run a nation with 140 crore bach Shahs and Begums rulers? In some extent it happens and therefore I'd like to give you two examples to justify this statement. In the United States of America, I'm not saying everything there is good but in terms of democracy, they have a two-century lead over us. An immigrant from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, China, wherever, if he or she has applied for the green card or the citizenship of the United States will easily pick up a telephone to ask about the status of his application. Whether the application is being considered, whether there are any defects in it, when is it likely to be considered, so on and so forth and 99% he or she will get a rational answer from the other side of the telephone because a human being is called. You are all first-rate citizens of India. If you apply to change the interest in your ration card and you do not get a reply, most of you will not become the form to try and ask about the status of your application. Even if you go there, your chance of getting a rational answer are 50-50 only. That is the important part. The basis of human beings as rulers, as democracy is a fundamental basis. One more example, I'd like to give you a story that all of you know but look at it from a slightly different perspective. Over 125 years back in South Africa, Mohandas Karanjan Gandhi got inside that train in the first-class compartment. He had a first-class ticket but the white man objected, hence the police and the railway official took him off the train. In that same story is written that Mohandas Karanjan Gandhi complained about what had happened to him by telegram and in 12 to 14 hours, the railway official came and put him on the next train. Think of the significance of this story. Mohandas Karanjan Gandhi was not a citizen of South Africa. Mohandas Karanjan Gandhi by the South African law then was a second day human being. Even as a human being, he was treated as a second day human being because he was not a white man. Despite such a law, when he complained the system responded because one human being had complained. Today in the Indian railways, if you file a complaint in 12 to 14 hours, in 12 to 14 days, if you get an acknowledgement, you'll consider yourself pretty lucky. Respect for the individual is the fundamental of democracy. Respect for the individual is a fundamental thing without which there can be no democracy, there can be no monitoring, there can be no better governance. That is the belief that people who believe in democracy have and right to information indirectly empowers the citizen to make him or her powerful enough to challenge the system to demonstrate that he owns the government. In a democracy, you and I own the government. Each individual owns the government, not just collectively. Each one of us owns the government. Again, when I was talking like this at one college seminar, one student got up and said, Sir, what are you doing? I said, yes. He said, if I like a government car, can I take it home? I said, you can't take it home. He said, then you're lying. You said, I own the government. I'm the ruler of this government. Then if I like a government car, why can't I take it home? The answer I told him was that he owned it with 140 crore other Indians. It was a joint ownership and therefore one person takes it away to deprive the others. But this is important to understand. The information in the cupboards, files, computers of the government also belongs to each one of us. We own it. Therefore, the default mode is information belongs to us and if that information is given to us, it does not deprive anybody else. Therefore, right to information converts the concept of democracy into an actual practical thing. And one individual, we need not be in a mass of people, we need not be 50 people, five people, 10 people. One individual asks for information which is on government records and that must be provided on pain of penalty. Worldwide, such transparency law first came in Sweden on 2nd December 1776, 250 years back. After that, for nearly 150 years, no other country passed such a law. And in the last century now, over 120 countries have such a transparency law, which goes by three different names. FOI, freedom of information, RTI, right to information and ATI access to information. These are the same words used in different countries for this. In India, the first movement appears to have started in rural Rajasthan. Then a combination of three unique people got together. Aruna Roy, an IAS officer who at a young age gave up a job to serve people in the village. Nikhil De, a lawyer about 20 years younger than her, who had qualified in the United States, decided to join her. And Shankar Singh, a man of rural Rajasthan, who was an excellent communicator. These three people got together and started explaining the concept of democracy to people. And from there, the right to information movement grew. Then of course, lots of people joined it. And ultimately, on 12th October, 2005, the right to information became a National Act operation throughout the nation. And incidentally, 12th October, 2005 was Vijayadashmi. It was a very significant day. It was not planned like that. It just happened. This is a powerful tool to bring actual democracy to India. This is a powerful tool to empower the citizen and keep remembering this. And I hope at the end of this talk, you will have picked up something or write to information. But more importantly, you will get up believing that you are the ruler of this nation. You are the bachha or the being of this nation. Now I go through some of the provisions of the law and try and explain the law from my perspective. Mr. Vikas, I have screen sharing permission. Can you see the presentation? Okay. Right to Information Act 2005. Let's look at the preamble of the law. Whereas the Constitution of India has established a democratic republic. And whereas democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information which are vital to its functioning. And also to contain corruption and to hold governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the government. And whereas revelation of information in actual practice is likely to conflict with other public interests, including efficient operations of the government, optimum use of limited fiscal resources and the preservation of confidentiality of sensitive information. Parliament was aware that there may be some practical difficulties in sharing information with citizens. But it recognized that citizens are the owners and rulers on this nation. And whereas it is necessary to harmonize these conflicted interests while preserving the paramotions of the democratic idea. That is what the RTI Act is. The harmonizing has been done by the law. There are some people who say, oh, we will harmonize. No. The law has harmonized it. Parliament has harmonized it. And the provisions of the law must be followed. What is information? This is extremely important to understand. I've seen people who've used the RTI Act for a number of times, but have never understood this. Information means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, et cetera, et cetera. And information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being enforced. In simple terms, if I put it, what it says is information must exist. What exists is information what does not exist is not information. So if you say, what is the meaning of a law? That is not information unless there is a record which says what is the meaning of the law. If you ask if I apply for a job, will I get it? That is not asking for information because that is you are actually interrogating. RTI is right to information, not right to interrogation. This is extremely important to understand. And information relating to any private, RTI applies to public authorities. What is a public authority we'll see soon. Other private bodies which are not covered by the definition of public authority do not come under the ambit of RTI. However, information that is supplied to a public authority which can be accessed by a public authority has to be accessible by the citizen also. The principle is you own the government, everything in government is yours. Everything private is not necessarily yours. But if it belongs to the government, you have the right. Who has to give information? Public authorities. Section 2A defines this. Public authority means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted by or under the constitution, by any other law made by parliament, by any other law made by stateless pleasure. The first three cover almost everything that we consider as government, with some corporations, state governments, central governments, panchayats, all of these are covered by one A, B, and Z. Also, there are some bodies that are created by an act of parliament or legislature. For example, the Singh Gurudwara Provincial Committee has been created by an act of parliament. So that's a public authority. This says by notification issued or order made by the appropriate government. If somebody is created by notification specifically, for example, all deep universities are created by notification issued by government and therefore they are public authorities and includes anybody owned, controlled or substantially financed. Non-government organizations substantially financed directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate government. Because if somebody seems to be pulling around, can you please do something about it? I'd be obliged if you can do something. Now, there's been some controversy about the PMKS fund. They are saying PMKS fund is not a public authority because they consist that it's not financed by government, that it's not owned by government, and nor is it controlled. They've specifically written that it will not be controlled to stay out of RTI. However, think carefully. The trustees of the PMKS fund, the chairman is the Prime Minister of India. Three other ministers are ex-official trustees of the trust. When they represent the government in its official capacity, they cannot claim that it's a private enterprise. The control is on behalf of government. It would be a slur of their integrity to claim that they do not represent the government's view. Therefore, it is being controlled by government and therefore is certainly a public authority and must follow RTI act. Section 2J, RTI act, right to information means the right to information accessable under this act, which is held by or under the control of any public authority, and includes the right to inspection of work documents records. You can inspect documents, you can inspect records, you can inspect works. What exists, I repeat, is information. Therefore, a road that exists, a building that exists. One young chap in Mumbai decided to inspect the government hospital. That is also part of RTI. Taking notes extracts of certified copies of documents or records. This is what most of the time people do, taking photocopies of records, taking extracts from records and so on. Taking certified samples of material, you can also take samples of material. For example, if you believe that a government hospital has got fake medicines, you can take samples and get it tested. If you believe the completing being done in a government job is of poor quality, you can take a sample again and get it tested. Obtaining information in the form of biscuits, floppy steams, videocassets or any other electronic board, or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device. You can take information on a computer on a hard disk or on a pen drive or also on a hard copy. CCTV footage is also included and this can be a very widely source of information, increasingly, since many public places are covered by CCTV. Most important section in the RTI Act, in my opinion, is section three. It is the shortest but is very, very meaningful. Subject to the provisions of this act, all citizens should have the right to information. Who will have the right to information? All citizens of India because they own the government. Those who are not citizens of India do not own the government. They are not rulers of this nation. Citizens of India are rulers of this nation. Can any information be denied? That's a philosophical question. If I own it in my house, I can open any cupboard, any drawer I like and nobody can stop me. I don't need any permission. I don't need any local standard. Then in the government, if I own the government, all information should be available to me. However, it is felt that some information should not remain available because it would harm certain interests with need to be protected and that is specified in section eight and nine of the act. Section nine covers copyright. So anything that is copyrighted, you cannot say I should get copies of that. Section eight one has ten exact provisions, exactly ten provisions. That is information that shall not be given. Can anybody say this information is confidential and hence not given? The answer is no. It must be covered by section eight, one, ten provisions and we'll deal with that a little later. Section four is the heart of the RTI Act. Every public authority shall maintain all its records during cataloging index in a manner and form which facilitates the right to information under this act and ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerized are within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources computerized and connected through a network all over the country on different systems so that access to such records is facilitated. This was a promise of the law. All records should be kept properly etc. Yes, but are appropriate to be computerized within a reasonable time. Sixteen years is a reasonable time. Today all government offices have got computers. All subordinate courts have got computers. Gram Panchayat offices have got computers with internet connectivity. What is the actual truth? Quite often a citizen goes to a government office to follow up on an application or complaint or representation and is told finally meet that. File is not available, not traceable. To pay 100 rupees the file may surface. To pay 500 rupees a record can be changed, pay 1000 rupees a record may be removed. Maybe for 2000 rupees the entire file can be made to disappear. All this can stop. What is the promise of this? That all work would be done on computers. Even today all letters are being typed on computer and the files would move electronically. If it moves electronically, changes are not possible to know. They can be caught. Any change in a file can be identified with a person. Today our banking industry runs purely on internet. This can happen in government also. If a file originates in one place and has to travel, today the file physically has to travel. Electronically it could travel in five different cities of the country and the result can come back in less than an hour. The efficiency would go up. Corruption would become by at least 30%. At least 30% of our corruption takes place by pooling around with files and equally important you would save thousands of crores of rupees on paper, files, space to keep these files, cost of trying to locate files which get lost. All of this can change. Provided we work only on computers and that is possible. That is not difficult. Resources exist. Only the will is not there. We can curb corruption, forget local. Local will do nothing. Just by getting everything on electronic paperless we will save thousands of crores and we will save a few million trees every year. That is something that we can do. Unfortunately, this has not been done adequately. There are 16 points in section 41B17. Such other information may be prescribed. The heart of the RTI act, unsatisfactory implementation, computerization is a heart in my opinion which could make things automatically transparent and every evening the work done in an office can be on the internet so that the default board is recognizing that the citizen owns the information and it should be available. It would also make the job of public officers easy public information officers over 50% applications seek information which should be available under section 4. Unfortunately, this is not happening and that is why the RTI applications are growing. Every public authority shall within 100 days which is long back. Designate as many officers as the PIOs, Central Public Information Officers or State Public Information Officers in all administrative units or offices under it as may be necessary to provide information to persons requesting for the information under this act. Find below who has to give information to public authorities but how do we access it? Who do we see? Do we go about finding out? Know the answer is the act says all administrative units of a public authority shall have a person designated as the Public Information Officer. He's generally a person who's doing something else but is also given the job of being a Public Information Officer and therefore you need not worry about who the Public Information Officer is. You just need to write to the Public Information Officer, think of which public authority is likely to have the information that you are seeking, likely to. Apply to the Public Information Officer of that Public Authority and that office. Supposing it is not in that office then what happens? If it is in the same department, the law requires that this should be accessed from the other departments and given to you. If it is a completely different department, supposing you asked the RTI query which you believe genuinely should be with the police but it is actually with the municipal corporation, what should happen? Can they return it? The answer is no. You are recognized as a ruler of this nation and therefore the law requires that the application must be transferred within five days by the PIO to the right PIO. Your position as sovereign of this nation is actually actualized in this law. A person who desires to obtain information under this action 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. Many government departments today and many state governments have got RTI online also so where it is easy to make an RTI application online. Incidentally, no form is required. Some people follow a format which you may follow and in most cases the application fees 10 rupees. You can make the application in English or Hindi or the official language of the area in which the application is being made but you cannot insist that you must get a response in the language you choose. The response can be any of these three. An applicant making request for information shall not be required to give any reason for requesting the information or any of the personal details except those that may be necessary if you're contacting him. Many government officers feel this is not correct. Why should somebody harass us without any reason? You must give a reason for asking and a lot of people have said this is a fault in the law. Please remember, right to information is a fundamental right of citizen in article 191A. If I have to give reasons for seeking information, I'll have to tomorrow give reasons for speaking. I'll have to give reasons for writing an essay, for publishing something. For none of these do I need it because it's my fundamental right of expression. This has been recognized by the Supreme Court and it's very unfortunate that sometimes even court judges make such remarks in a frivolous manner. No locus timely is required. It is your right because you own the information, I repeat. On receipt of a request under section 6, PIO shall as expeditiously as possible. In any case, within 30 days of the receipt of the request, either provide the information on payment of statute as may be prescribed or reject the request for any of the reasons specified in section 8 and 9. I repeat, section 9 is to do with copyright infringement. So if somebody's caught, for example, if you asked, sent some board and said, I want the DVD of a movie, that may be denied to you because it would influence somebody's copyright. Apart from that, section 8, 10, section is all you need to know. Section 8, 1 is 380 words to be exact. That is the only information which can be denied. Default board is all the information belongs to you. If PIO fails to give decision on the request for information within the period prescribed, which is 30 days, PIO shall be deemed to have refused the request. And this means a refusal without reasons. And that invites the penal provisions of the law. Now, the way the law is structured, you file an application generally with a 10-rupee Indian Postal Order or RTI online. The first day is the day the PIO receives the RTI. The PIO's office receives the RTI application. Then supposing the information you are seeking is 200 pages. The PIO can charge you at the rate of 2 rupees per page. So 200 into 400 rupees, he will send you a letter. The moment he sends the letter, the 30-day clock stops. Then when you pay the money, 30-day clock starts again. But if a person making a request for the information shall be provided with the information free of charge, then a public authority fails to comply within the time limit specified in Subsection 1. If in 30 days the information is not given, you will have the information is 1000 pages, the public information officer cannot charge you for it. 30-day period I thought I'll just explain in another manner also. PIO receives RTI application day one. After next days, PIO sends the letter asking additional fees 30-day clock stops. Additional fees paid, 30-day clock starts again. Information sent after Y days, X plus Y less than or equal to 30 days. If RTI application is transferred, as I said in different departments, the RTI application is transferred, they get 5 days for transferring through the period becomes 35 days. Now I have given some samples of RTI applications. A good RTI application is focused. Think of what is your objective. You don't have to explain the objective, but you have an objective in mind. You think something is wrong, you want to expose it, you feel you want to pressurize because your application is not being responded to an investigation that you have asked for is not happening. Whatever it is, you have something in mind. Focus on that and make it as short and focused as possible. The law doesn't say anything like this, but I've seen RTI applications which go rambling and we don't achieve anything. I've given some instances of RTI application which I'm not going to read out. This presentation is going to be shared with all of you. Take a look at it. It's pretty focused and it is obvious that there's a purpose. Just to give you one example, number two. I want a copy of the minutes of the meeting of the public hearing. Gram Sabha held on 15-7-2019 along with the file lotings and comments from the officers. That's all. That's an RTI application. If there are any wrongs for inspection and maintenance of roads, I want a copy of the same and designations of officers responsible for doing this work. If there are inspection roads of the roads, I want a copy of these as well. Short, brief, focused. That makes it difficult for a government officer to try and dodge or say, I did not understand what you meant. A good practice initially, if you have not used RTI extensively earlier, is to make the RTI application draft and show it to your wife or friend or somebody and see if it makes sense to them. Sometimes you have in mind what you want, but you're not able to put it in words. And when you don't put it in words, even an honest public information officer is not able to help you. These are, again, for example, a simple one. If you want to inspect files, here's the suggested format. I want to inspect files relating to so and so. I will bring Mr. So-and-so to assist me in the inspection. Please suggest two dates of the time at which I could come for the inspection. I will identify the documents for which I want photocopies at the time of inspection. Please ensure that the pages of the files are numbered. When you go for an inspection, insist that all pages must be numbered, otherwise they could have taken out some information, and you will not know what happened. Now, here again, I want to remind all of us, RTI is the Fundamental Right of Citizens in Article 191, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression. Various Supreme Court judgments have held that this includes the right to information and right to publish. Please pause for a while and ask yourself, we say media is an important pillar of democracy. Is the media mentioned in the Constitution of India? The answer is no. It is not mentioned. Then, where does the power and the recognition for media come? It comes from Article 191A. Courts have held that media is a business like any other business and therefore deserves no specific protection. But it is the medium through which citizens get information. Therefore, media is very important. Now, if a fundamental right is given to me, restrictions have to be in the Constitution of India. It cannot be imposed outside. The only permissible restrictions are given in Article 192, which permits reasonable restrictions in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency of morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to an offense. As for Article 192, only in these matters can any restriction be put on my fundamental right and Article 191A. Right to speak, right to publish, right to information. These are at power and at one level, according to Supreme Court judgments and the Constitution of India. Now, we will take a look at the exemptions in the law. Exemptions from disclosure of information Section 8-1. Notwithstanding anything contained in this act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen. Information disclosure which traditionally affects the sovereignty, integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific, or economic interests of the state, relations with foreign states, or lead to incitement of an offense. Quite often, this is put as an omnibus exemption, which is wrong. We must identify whether it will affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, or the economic interests of the state, or relations with foreign states, or lead to incitement of an offense, and give some rational explanation. That is necessary when an exemption is claimed. Information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal the disclosure of which may constitute contempt of court. Quite often, when a matter is subject to this, PIOs deny information saying the matter is subject to this, hence we will not give it as per Section 8-1B. Wrong. That is not as per the law. The law knew the word subject. Parliament was aware of the word subject, but did not use it. What Parliament said is information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law. So if somebody is claiming exemption under Section 8-1B, he or she must be asked to give the exact citation by which this information is not to be given. Otherwise, if there is no specific court order, the information must be given to you. See, information the disclosure of which would cause the breach of privilege of Parliament or State Legislature. For example, before the budget is announced, if you ask for budget papers, that could infringe on the privilege of Parliament or State Legislature. Similarly, Commission of Inquiry Act says that within six months from the submission of the report, the report must be placed in Parliament or State Legislature. So before six months, you cannot get it or before it is placed in Parliament or State Legislature. But, and here is an important part of this. Quite often, Commission of Inquiry reports are made and put away if they are inconvenient to the government in power. Other scam in Mumbai that it occurred, I noticed that the Inquiry Commission had given a report. In six months, they did not place it in the floor of the State Legislature. So I asked for a copy of the report. They claimed it is breach of privilege of Legislature. I countered in the appeal that once the period of six months is crossed, you already breached this privilege of the State Legislature. You now cannot claim breach of privilege and they had to give the report to me. Information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party. There is a larger public interest override which we will deal with later. Two conditions have to be satisfied. It should be in the nature of commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property. That means information that probably would not be disclosed and it must harm the competitive position of a third party. Unless both conditions are satisfied, A20 cannot be claimed. For example, if you ask for the formulation of Coca-Cola, it may be denied to you because it clearly falls under this. However, Bank of India can claim this for information relating to its competition. But Indian Realities cannot claim it since it is not in a competitive field. Before a tender is allocated, this can be claimed. Once a tender is allotted, this cannot be claimed because it will not hurt anybody's competitive position. Information available to a person is financial relationship. This is a very commonly misused exemption by PIOs. They say that somebody has trust in government, therefore it is held in financial relationship, which is wrong. Really having trust is not the condition. The conditionality for this is it is given by somebody to somebody with superior knowledge. For his or her benefit, I go to a doctor, a lawyer, a banker for my benefit and I give information for my benefit. Me, I have a choice whether to give it or not. There is no law that forces me to give it. See, I have a choice of choosing whom to give it to. I can choose my banker, my doctor, my lawyer and yes, I have trust in such a person because only then will I go to him. 99% of the information in government records, in public records, is not held in a financial relationship, but quite often PIOs use this and average citizen says, do not accept claim for certain exemption. Information received in confidence from foreign government. Notice carefully, only in one place is the word confidence or confidentiality used where information is given by a foreign government and the government claims it is held in, it was given in confidence, then they can be no further arguments. The Rafal information was denied based on this argument. Information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement of security purposes. If disclosing such information is likely to endanger somebody's life, then it would be denied. Information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders. Quite often, when an investigation is ongoing, they say we will not give information because there is an ongoing investigation wrong. They must show that giving the information is likely to impede the process of investigation. In 70% of the cases, somebody has filed a complaint and he knows that no investigation is progressing, so therefore they ask for an RTI saying I want the progress of this complaint and this 8-1-H is claimed, wrong. It would be laughable to claim that the person who filed a complaint is likely to impede the process of investigation. Information must be provided unless they can show how it will impede the process of investigation. 8-1-I, cabinet papers including records of deliberations of the councils of ministers, secretaries and other officers. Provided that the decisions of councils of ministers, the reason they are off and the material in the base of the decisions are taken, shall be made public after the decision has been taken the matter is completely told over. This is a very interesting exception. Up to a certain point, information is exempt until the decisions are taken. However, once decision of the council of ministers is taken, the decisions they are off and the material in the base of the decisions taken shall be made public after the decision has been taken. What is emphasized is, for example, when a bill is presented in parliament, there is a discussion in the council of ministers, between officers and the government and so on. Once the decision is taken to table the bill in parliament or state legislature, once the bill is placed, the basis on which this decision was taken should be made public and made so more to available on websites. The whole idea of democracy, citizens will discuss and debate the reasons given and the pros and cons of a bill. That is how democracy should work, not by suddenly passing bills in parliament without any discussion. Citizens should also have a say in it. Citizens are the masters of this democracy and therefore that is what this law recognizes. 8-1-J, this is the most popular exemption which is grossly misused by public information officers. Information which relates to personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual. Larger public interest, we will deal with later, provided that the information which cannot be denied to the parliament or the state legislature shall not be denied to any person. Quite often PIOs say it is personal information, your name is personal, your age is personal, color of your hair is personal. If you write a letter, who wrote the letter? Mr. X wrote the letter, so it is personal, it can be identified with an actual person. But being personal does not exempt information. Parliament specifically said if it is personal information, it may qualify but then it has to satisfy other conditions. The disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest. 99% of the information in government offices is the consequence of public activity. Your private activity you don't go and file. What I eat at home, I don't go and file in government. But if the government has paid the bill, then I may file the bill with the government and then it is a public activity. Or we should cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual. Now we have a slightly funny dispute if you may call it. What is privacy? Everybody says privacy is a fundamental right as declared by a nine judge bench of the Supreme Court of India and put the Swami's case. Yes. Read the whole judgment. You cannot figure out what is privacy. So how is a PIO supposed to, this confusion of what is a public activity and what is privacy was the parliament was aware of. Therefore it put an asset test only to this proviso provision. Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the parliament or state legislature shall not deny to any person. What this means is if somebody claims exemption section 81 J and says I will not give information because it is personal information, he or she must declare that in their opinion, whether it's a public activity or a private activity. For example, you apply for a government job, that's a public activity. If you apply for a car surgery, that's a public activity, that's not a private activity. Or is it an invasion on privacy? There's a lot of gray area and people may have different connotations on privacy, but it should be laid down in my opinion. However, it must be tested on this. Provided that the information which cannot be denied to parliament or state legislature shall not be denied to any person. What this means is whoever is denying information 81 J, public information officer, first step in authority or judge must make a statement that in my opinion, I would not permit this information to be given to parliament. Article 19 talks of permissible restrictions in article 19 1A. And the only two words that would meet privacy, decency or morality. If something violates decency or morality, it should not be given in RTI, it should not be given to parliament or state legislature. Therefore, a rejection in 81 J must state that I would not give this information to parliament or state legislature. It's a subjective assessment. Notwithstanding in the official secrets act 1923, not any of the exemptions permissible in accordance with subsection 1, a public authority may allow access to information if public interest and disclosure outweighs the harm to protected interest. Please note carefully, public interest is required to be demonstrated only if an exemption applies, not otherwise. Official secrets act 1923 cannot be claimed as a reason for denying information. Exemptions cannot be claimed unless a larger public interest is demonstrated. To give an example, Miram Modi's company, you may seek information from Punjab National Bank about Miram Modi's company's account. And it may be rightfully denied under section 81 E saying it's fiduciary. And yes, information by a bank is held in a fiduciary capacity. But you could then argue that as per section 82, because there is a major scam, this information must be released as a larger public interest and disclosure. And I would say this would fall in the gray area of the law. Section 81 J, again, I have delineated just to explain that 81 J denies 90% of the denies under 82 and J are wrong and not as per the law at all. If the PI does not respond to you or does not give you the information, what do you do? You file a first appeal to First Appearance Authority within 30 days for not getting information, incomplete information or wrong information. First Appearance Authority should decide in 30 days, but you can extend it by 15 days by giving reasons. If the result of First Appeal not satisfactory, file second appeal to the Commission within 19 days. For state government bodies, there is a state Commission for the central government bodies, there is a Central Commission, I was a Central Information Commissioner. Section 19-5 says, owners of PIO, the denial of information is justified. The law recognizes your right as your default right. If information is denied by a PIO, he has to justify why he did not give information. You do not by law require to explain why you want information. And I repeat, no larger public interest needs to be demonstrated unless an exemption is established. Only if an exemption is established, is a larger public interest required to be demonstrated. Appeal, carefully look at the response and see if information has been provided. Information can only be denied if it is not available anywhere. It is available with another office and must be obtained and given. With a different department, the application should be transferred. Or if it is exempt under Section 8 or 9, these are the only reasons based on which information may be denied to you. Section 20 is the teeth of the act. Without Section 20, this act would have been useless. If information denied without reasonable cause, Commission must penalize the PIO, Dean PIO, Rs. 250 per day of delay after giving an opportunity of explaining. Maximum penalty, Rs. 25,000. Commission can also recommend disciplinary action against the officer and the compensation to be paid to the applicant. This, as I said, is the teeth of the act. This is the reason why the act works. Unfortunately, commissioners are rather lacks in imposing penalties and treat it as if it's a capital punishment. It is not capital punishment. If without any reasonable cause, PIOs deny information, they must be subjected to penalty. This is the clause that recognizes the sovereignty of the individual citizen. There is no other law in India. Here is a law that says the right of one individual was without reason denied. Therefore, the public servant must pay a penalty from his or her own salary up to Rs. 25,000 for this. This is like the sovereign of a nation. If he was denied something which was his rightful information, supposing Akbar Maksha or Shivaji Maharaj asked for some information from their court here. The courtier said, they would have probably put them in prison. We don't get to put them in prison, but we get the satisfaction of being penalized. And that demonstrates your position as the sovereign of this nation. Section 22 is also very important. The provisions of this act shall have effect, notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith containing the official secrets act and any other law for the timing in force or any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this act. A lot of legal tangles come in because somebody says, oh, as for banking act, this is the position. Somebody says, as per RBI law, this is the position. Somebody might say, as per company law, this is the position. So you have to resolve between different laws. RTI Act was conscious of this. And therefore it said that this law overrides all other earlier laws. As far as giving of information is concerned, let me clarify. Only in terms of giving of information does this law override everything else, not for anything else. It's not a grievance address format. It's an information format. It's a law for giving information, not for grievance addressing. Though quite often grievances do get redressed, but by law, there is no provision that should give you redress a law for grievance appeals. RTI application information in 30 days. If no response provided or unsatisfactory response, first I mean to be filed within 30 days of response or 60 days in case of no response. Sometimes the question that comes is, if I'm not, how do I, where do I find my first appeal? The law requires the PIO to give you the information of the details of the first appellate authority. But if he has not responded to you or not given the information, then what do I do? A simple technique is to file an RTI application, to file the first appeal with the first appellate authority, care of public information officer and send it in the same address. Below that right that the law requires you to give me information about the appellate authority since you have not done it, you must not forward it to the first appellate authority. First appellate authority order after hearing within 45 days. If unsatisfactory order or no response, second appeal to commission within 90 days of first appellate authority's order or 120 days from the date of first appeal, if no order is received from first appellate authority. Now, some states have formats which you can follow. You don't need to go anywhere to take a form. This is the format of Maharashtra, it can be used, central government has no format, it can be like a straight letter, but you can also use this format since it's useful. This is a story that has happened thousands of times over. This is an actual RTI application that was filed by a young boy from Bidarbha who had come to Mumbai looking for a job, where he stayed, he stayed with an uncle of his in a slum. And while he was going around, he saw an RTI workshop being held. RTI workshops are held in various places, societies, clubs, associations, slums. So he sat down, he had nothing to do, he sat down and understood what is RTI. He understood that what exists on record is information. He was applied to the public information office, he doesn't need a form, he can take any plain piece of paper and hand write it, computerize, print out or a type one. And he must seek information only, that is all that can happen. So therefore, he used this. He understood all this and moved on. After a few days, he got a job and then he needed a ration card. So he went to the rationing office, gave his application. As he was walking out of the door, the peon accosted him and the peon said, And the peon said, The peon said, This voice, without batting an eyelid, gave an answer. He said, I will not pay a bribe. I shall not give a bribe. The peon shrunk and said, Stupid idiot coming from a village, he doesn't know how cities work, he will never get his ration card. You don't need a ration card. This boy went back, he found out from others in the bus, that people who are paying bribes and getting their ration cards in about 40-45 days. He waited three months and then he filed this RTI application. And given an RTI application for ration card on 5th August 2006, photocopy of receipt attached. I want the following information about its progress in the following format. Date on which application received, name and designation of the officer receiving it, action taken, date on which forwarded to next office officer. There will be as many rows as number of officers who hand the application. Now this information has to be there. He wanted to know why have I not got my ration card. But if he asked that, there would be nothing on record. It would not be on record that he sincerely refused to bribe, he was not given. Number two, I want a list of ration cards issued in the last two months, given the dates or with the applications were made, the dates or with the ration cards were issued. Now both these are the information which should be available on record. What could they tell him? Your file has not moved at all because you have not given Chai Pani. And the list would show that others have been given. Intellectually it framed the RTI application. Next day, the Pune came to his house and said, the rationing officer has called you. He went to the office. As soon as the officer saw him, the officer said, I have brought a chair for him. And I have brought his ration card and a glass of water. He did not give Chai Pani, he got Chai Pani instead. And to me, that one cup of tea was respect for the individual sovereign citizen of this nation. That is what it means far more than the information, far more than his ration card. I repeat, this is not a grievance interest mechanism. But quite often there is pressure when people are acting illegally and that leads to the redressing of certain grievances. Of course, his right to information still remain. I am not very sure what he did. This kind of format and this kind of information has been sought thousands of times. Ration cards, income tax refunds, other bookings, jobs, and so on and so forth. And as I listed, similar responses quite often. This is another RTI application that I want to show to you. This demonstrates how powerful the RTI Act can work at times. There are very good government officers, honest government officers, but they are not able to deliver because the system doesn't back them. If systems were back and supported by Indian citizens, it could bring a sea change. And this is one of such examples. This is before I became a commissioner. I was just an ordinary citizen of Mumbai doing various jobs and also talking of RTI and teaching people RTI. One fine day, in the morning, I saw on the front page of Times of India a photograph of Mumbai citizens demonstrating because a minor had been raped by one police constable. On the same day, on page five, I saw a small news item. This small news item said that one police inspector of Mumbai police had raped a minor the earlier year. The evidence was clear, he was suspended from service. In the case went to court, the court did not find him guilty and therefore he was released. And he was being reinstated in the police service. When we read some things, we feel angry. I also felt angry and I decided to use RTI. Description of the information required. According to a newspaper, but news report in the Times of India dated 29th April, 06. Inspector Prakash Auri was accused of raping a minor girl in September, 2005. He was acquitted by the session squad in February and has been reinstated in the service. I want a photocopy of the order reinstating him along with the file notings based on when the decision was taken. I didn't say why have you reinstated him. I only said I want a copy of the record. The PR refused and I filed a first appeal to the first deputy authority, et cetera. Grounds for appeal. Facts on the case. I had asked for information regarding the reinstatement of Inspector Prakash Auri as for the attached application. The PR first sent me a letter stating the information would be provided by Bhai Kala police station. Bhai Kala replied by his letter of 16.5 that the information could not be provided as it was exempt under section 8193 exempts information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension of prosecution or offenders. Grounds for appeal. PIA has not shown how providing the information could impede any investigation. In fact, no investigation has been held since Prakash Auri has been reinstated. The rejection is without any basis in law. Generally for a first appellate hearing, they call the applicant. There's a very good deputy commissioner of police. I don't recall his name but he understood what I was driving at. As I said, I was just an ordinary citizen in 2006. So he said, Mr. Gandhi, I understand what you are doing, but the court has released him. What could we do? I said, sir, from my perspective, I'm only asking for a copy of the record. And B, there are two possibilities. Either Prakash Auri is guilty of the crime he's elected to have committed, in which case reinstating him is gross disservice to the citizens and to the rule of law and to the police force itself. Alternatively, he may be innocent. If he's innocent, somebody framed him, someone else should pay for it. He saw the point and he said, Mr. Gandhi, let me see what I can do. In 20 days time, I got it in writing from the police commissioner of Mumbai that police inspector Prakash Auri had been dismissed from service. That is the power of right to information which one individual citizen can exercise. A police inspector was dismissed, largely because of the very good deputy commissioner of police who must have worked behind the scenes to get him dismissed. But some things can happen. Some things do happen. Citizens need to do something about it. If you just sit back and say, nothing is going to happen. Summary for the central government, no specified format for application that first appears useful to use the Maharashtra format. Application fee rupees 10. Most convenient to attach Indian postal order of rupees 10. No fees for appeals. For second appeal, please check rules at CIC.gov.in. Online RTI application and first appeal can be filed at three or four states. Some of the states may also be offering it. Please take a look. On Google, you type name of state and RTI online. You may discover that RTI online are and then you can pay the fee by credit card or net banking or UPI. This is a very powerful tool given to Indian citizens. Nobody is done as a favor. This right existed the day the Constitution of India was made and Article 19 money came into me on 26 January, 1950. But there was no codification of this law and therefore we had no practical means of getting information from the government. If you had asked before the law, it was a very laborious process. Some people had gone to courts and got information, but it was a very, very laborious process. The law in my opinion is one of the best laws in the world. I studied some of the other laws interacted with some of the other countries and I can say with great pride, Indian parliament has given us one of the best laws in the world. But in terms of implementation, our implementation is very poor. That is because information commissioners are not doing their jobs well. Courts are also not taking pro-transferred positions and citizens are being a little lax. If you are the sovereign of this nation, you owe a responsibility also. Shivaji Maharaj, your Agmar Bhatia, when something went wrong did not say I am the ruler, I will only exercise authority. They said setting it right is my responsibility. Setting India right, setting India's governance right, making a democracy work is your and my responsibility individually. Not necessarily as a group. I was talking like this and at one talk, one gentleman, my age, got up and said, Mr Gandhi, this is what I like to say, I like it, I like it, I like it. I have done a lot of RTI applications, I have done a lot of complaints, I have done a lot of representation in India, nothing happens here. Nothing can happen in India to such people, I say. Many of us go to mandirs, masjids, kurudwaras, churches, agyaris, bare view. When you go there and come out, does a hundred rupee note extra fall in your wallet? The answer is no. You become more handsome, younger, more intelligent, something visibly happens to you, the answer is no. And why do you do it? We do it as an act of faith. We have faith that by doing this, something good will happen to me, my family, my society, my city, my nation. What do we do for the nation is an act of faith? Zero. Let us try this, an act of faith for the nation. A survey of mine shows that all Indian citizens creep for two to three hours every month about what is wrong with India and its governance. Politicians are bad, police, minister, roads are bad and so on and so forth. Does that criming change anything? The answer is no. Nothing changes, nothing will change because you're for criming. It's good to salute the national flag, to feel pride in the flag, to sing the national anthem. Let me put a proposition to you. Supposing the entire nation, all citizens decided from one day for a 12-hour period from 8 in the morning to 8 in the night to stand before the national flag, eat nothing, drink nothing, just keep saying the national anthem, would anything change? These are useful symbols, but we need to do something. Patriotism is feeling the need to change my nation to make it better, to change the governance and to feel responsible. If you are the ruler of this nation, you have a responsibility to make it better. I hope you go back feeling that you are the ruler of this nation and feel the sense of responsibility for that. I have a simple slogan that I'd like to share with you. Quite often we write, we say, but we don't really believe it, do we? Therefore, I say, My India is not great. My India is not great, but this is my fault. I, the individual sovereign citizen of this nation, am responsible. I am the king of this nation. And my responsibility is if this nation is not better, to make this nation better is my national flag. Thank you. Thank you very much, friends. Yeah, I'm done. Thank you. So, Mr. Gandhi, in a very subtle manner, you have explained what can be done. Like you shared, we will take one of the workshops. What are the exact procedures? Because today was a hurricane knock within the T20 itself. So, what should be the procedure to inspect the reports of, say, in these deeds registered on a particular day in the sub-register and then, if required, take photos of these? I have the format of inspection that I've given. In that, say, I want to inspect records relating to whatever subject or time or give a description of that. Give a slightly wider description. Don't give too wide a description. If you're not very sure, give a slightly wider, but slightly wider. Maybe the first time you may not get it right. Second time you would get it. You would understand there's some technicalities. But a simple RT application can get you inspection. And normally, as I have suggested, ask for two dates with time. And you pick one of those and go there and inspect. This is fairly simple. Inspection is a right given to citizens and the RTI. And the format also in the applications. This is the Padma Bhan. No case number has been given by the state information commissioner for law or second appeals filed last year. What can be done? That is a weak point. Unfortunately, the commissions, as I said, are not really responsive, are not really fit to do that. Many of them, not all of them, but a very large number of them are not fit to do their jobs. And this is something which I find in not just information commissions, Human Rights Commission, Women's Commission, Children's Commission, Lokayotes, Lokpal. Lokpal, we had lots of people on the roads saying we want to Lokpal. Over two years now, since we've got a Lokpal, what's happened? We are not taking accountability from these bodies. We need to find a way of putting pressure on them. This is wrong. When I was a commissioner, I used to ensure that 99% of the cases were disposed in less than three months. In my opinion, if it is not disposed in 60 to 90 days, RTI becomes right to history. But we need to build sufficient citizen pressure. The High Courts in Karnataka and Calcutta have given decisions saying that commissions must give decisions within 45 days. That's not being implemented. I have filed a PIL in Bombay High Court asking for this to be implemented. But I think if, nationally, in various states, we file applications, we file PILs. Maybe we'll get a better response. We need to make the commissions work properly. Can companies seek information from the RTI and does private insurance companies come into the RTI? Private insurance companies are unlikely to come unless you can show that they are subsidized by government or have government has actual control. But information that they file with the insurance regulatory authority can be accessed. If this is by Krishna, if RTI application is rejected or inappropriate bound by the IEO, an appropriate authority holds it appropriate. Is there any provision for punishment for the IEO in addition to information? IEO being the PIO or the first-ever IEO? Sorry, PIO. Yes, there is up to 25,000 rupees, 250 rupees per day of delay. We have to 25,000 rupees. And if the denial is recurrent, if somebody should don't to be like this, then this reaction can also be recommended against it. Also compensation can be awarded to the applicant. Once RTI copies of the investigation report was given only 19 out of 300 odd pages, cops saying given the rest of the copies will get into trouble. This question is incomplete. Sorry, I didn't understand. No, that question was not very happily worded on the platform I've taken. That's wrong. How to ask complete records for investigation report of an FIR that was closed as a B report. Sorry, come again. How to seek an information in respect of an FIR where the conclusion report has been given. Ask for it specifically. Say what you want. Whatever has been stated is what you need to state in your IT application that I want to see records or I want copies of records of this FIR. And what if a file is damaged by floods or a fire before this act is being enacted or later on also. For that there's no real solution, but sometimes it is possible to reconstruct files. So you can say that reconstruct the file, but that's a dicey thing. There's no universal thing. If a file is damaged, as I said, information has to exist. If it doesn't exist, it's not information. Can an advocate seek information on behalf of the client for any information on the RTA? You don't need a locus timely. Therefore, why should you file it on? Why should an advocate file it on behalf of somebody else? Any citizen of India can ask for information. Companies, etc. cannot ask for information. By law, they are not entitled to information. These are fundamental rights. Fundamental rights belong to citizens of India, but there's no requirement of locus timely. Only exception, I would say, supposing you are asking personal information of a client as a lawyer, what you can do is if you want the lawyer to ask for information, he can give a copy of a no objection from the individual and do it otherwise. But there's no such requirement of locus timely at all. Therefore, in most cases, you do not need to represent anyone. Also, Vikasi, I'd be very happy if people challenge what I'm saying. I would very much welcome that. If you do not agree with me on the meaning of the law, on whatever I have said, please challenge me. Go right ahead and let's have a discussion. I'm quite open to it. I have no hang-ups like that. The only reason normally the applications are filed through the lawyer's office is because they feel that sometimes there's too much delay in the appellate authority, etc. So the office of the advocate can handle it. That is one of the fundamentals I've seen that the advocates are handling. Then the advocate can file it on his own name. That's what he's saying. Instead of saying that I'm filing it for somebody else, say you are filing for information, end of story. This is by Dhyan, whether we can seek access to a pending document before 10 years through RTA. What is the time limit? Thousand years. If a document exists, you can seek information. There is no time limit. Since the time limit has been mentioned, after 20 years are over from the event, seven exemption clauses do not apply. Only three exemption clauses apply, A, C, and I. Seven exemption clauses, it's like the Amitabh Bachchan, Konbaniya, and Kalolpati. You can drop some queries. Similarly, in this, after 20 years, only three exemptions will apply. Seven exemptions do not apply. I want to send an RTA form to the sub-register of Bangalore. According to a website, other than 10 rupees in the IPO, additional 1 rupee per sheet must be paid. How to pay that, sir? How will I know? No, no. As I explained, you file your RTA application with the application fee. The PIO has to inform you how many pages because you cannot know how many pages it is. So the PIO will send you a letter saying, the information is so many pages, please pay so much money. After that, you make the payment. Is that clear? Sir, by Dilip, whether it is mandatory or directly for the State Information Commissioner to hear a third party as per Section 19 sub clause 4 of the RTA Act before taking decisions? And if there are any citations in this regard? If there is a feeling that third party is involved and information may be considered confidential, then there is a need to call the third party to give his objections. But the objection is to be based not saying, I don't want to give the information. The objection is to be based on Section 8-1 only. The third party gets an opportunity to show that it is exempt. It does not mean he gets a veto. Chandrasekhar, if the PIO fails to take action in the appropriate manner under the RTA, can we initiate IPC proceedings against him for failureing to implement the law? You see, I have heard of a lot of people saying, I do not claim to be an expert on IPC. But I have not yet come across any such instance. A lot of people have talked of taking action in IPC, but I am not aware of any actual action having been taken. So I would not comment on that. Is there any way slash provision we can get the RTA within 30 days? We have come across where the PIO deliberately delays the matter. See, the whole system as planned in the law is that PIOs will be scared of parenting provisions. Very often PIOs are not scared because commissions are not working and citizens are not putting enough pressure on the commissions. So therefore, this anomaly comes in. If commissions give decisions within three months and penalize people when they do not supply information, this would be a completely different situation. That is where we need to build pressure from the citizens. Rajkaran, can I seek information regarding my own bank account of my bank transaction since bank had denied to give this when the letter was given? Definitely, you can seek information on this and say that I have no objection and you cannot claim that this is personal information of fiduciary relationship since I am the fiduciary. Last question, section 7.9 of RTAX and disproportionately these boards and hence denied the information by PMO. Information requested number of grievance about the police atrocities in a particular year. What is the manner to handle it? 7.9 is not a reaction. 7.9 says you should give it in a different form. So if it is excessive time requirement, then the PIO should offer either a few thousand pages of information and say you pay 2 rupees and extract the information or offer inspection of documents. We have taken the questions of whatever it has done forth and we will share the PPTs shared by Mr. Shailesh Gandhi in the groups and tomorrow at 4.30 we will be having amongst us Justice Ram Kumar the essentials for valid execution of an unprivileged bill. So do stay connected with us tomorrow at 4.30 and we will share the questions of Justice Ram Kumar which we will be taking because we all know those who have been connected with us webinar that Justice Ram Kumar takes the common questions which come in the legal way as well as in the factual aspects. So do stay connected with us and if you are not a member of the WhatsApp group or a telegram group, do join us and you can also like, subscribe and share the YouTube channel of We Are Los Angeles and thank you Mr. Gandhi for sharing the insights. It is a pleasure to do and we will do some more webinars on the workshops. Thank you.