An email in response to my RTI Bill posts (here and here):
First the Phukan report. The report was tabled in Parliament last week but the government rejected it for various reasons mentioned here and, I'm sure, many other reasons which are unmentionable. The Opposition who could have prevented this were outside parliament. As for the Nanavati commision report, I believe the report was to be tabled in the budget session, but wasn't (related news items here and here). Now it is promised in the monsoon session. But not everyone believes the government. The government is using a technicality (about the ATR) to delay it apparently. The reasons are obvious I think. But they do have six months to do it.
Now, I don't place too much significance that one report was tabled, on the last day of the session, or that the other one is held up for some tenuous reaons. The above things are happening in the political realm. The commissions/inquiries have political implications. And, being smart, the politicians have devised a set of rules and parameters for the comissions. Not only are the actual aspects to be looked into defined by the politicians but also what happens to the reports. For instance, reports can be tabled in parliament, but they can be rejected too. Reports need to be tabled, but only when the Action Taken Reports are ready. And so on.
But the fact that reports like the above are not being tabled for political reasons should not detract from the RTI bill. As I see it, this bill is to let people get information about the working of public authorities. It is for the citizenry, the people at large. The original bill itself says as much: it is to provide for "people to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority". It is to promote transparency and accountability - (optimistically) resulting in reduced corruption, inefficiency, etc. And this is good - of course, if people start exercising their right.
Now to Phukan. It is is more than the trip to Shirdi. He was not entitled to the IAF aircraft he got even on his tour of inspections. It is also more than a hundred rupees - it is the heat and dust of travelling like ordinary citizens (or whatever retired judges who are a Commission now are allowed) and having to wait at some out of the way railway station as the water tank is refilled. Whether the man let that influence him - I don't know. Having worked in a software company I know how clients are pampered. I'm sure that is the case in any firm. Why? True, they don't give projects (or business) based on that - because it is a question of money. But what does Phukan have at stake? And what if the NDA had come back to power as widely expected? Couldn't he have expected some more quid pro quo?
There are also instances like sending the Tehelka tapes for forensic analysis (to determine if they were doctored) even tough his predecessor (Venkataswami) had done that twice and found the tapes genuine. Also, in most of the cases Phukan suggests internal probes though in each case. According to at least one actor - Tehelka - in this whole affair these are questionable.
I don't know if he let anything other than the truth guide him - that is the reason I did not post anything on this topic. But one thing is for sure - he should have been more discreet.
I haven’t really understood this “Right to Information Bill” …It is ironical that the Government passes this bill and during the same parliament session the Opposition demands (albeit outside parliament) tabling of the few reports and Government refuses to do so !!! (say Nanavathi, Phukan etc)My response for what its worth :
BTW, Another funny thing is a retired judge (of SC?) is investigating a multi-crore scandal and he goes to inspect some stuff on oan official duty in a VVIP aircraft and on the sidelines goes to Shirdi and Ajanta Ellora during that time (on road not on VVIP air-craft), which probably costs him few hundred rupees, and he will be happy to give a clean chit to a Minister on this crores of rupees…
First the Phukan report. The report was tabled in Parliament last week but the government rejected it for various reasons mentioned here and, I'm sure, many other reasons which are unmentionable. The Opposition who could have prevented this were outside parliament. As for the Nanavati commision report, I believe the report was to be tabled in the budget session, but wasn't (related news items here and here). Now it is promised in the monsoon session. But not everyone believes the government. The government is using a technicality (about the ATR) to delay it apparently. The reasons are obvious I think. But they do have six months to do it.
Now, I don't place too much significance that one report was tabled, on the last day of the session, or that the other one is held up for some tenuous reaons. The above things are happening in the political realm. The commissions/inquiries have political implications. And, being smart, the politicians have devised a set of rules and parameters for the comissions. Not only are the actual aspects to be looked into defined by the politicians but also what happens to the reports. For instance, reports can be tabled in parliament, but they can be rejected too. Reports need to be tabled, but only when the Action Taken Reports are ready. And so on.
But the fact that reports like the above are not being tabled for political reasons should not detract from the RTI bill. As I see it, this bill is to let people get information about the working of public authorities. It is for the citizenry, the people at large. The original bill itself says as much: it is to provide for "people to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority". It is to promote transparency and accountability - (optimistically) resulting in reduced corruption, inefficiency, etc. And this is good - of course, if people start exercising their right.
Now to Phukan. It is is more than the trip to Shirdi. He was not entitled to the IAF aircraft he got even on his tour of inspections. It is also more than a hundred rupees - it is the heat and dust of travelling like ordinary citizens (or whatever retired judges who are a Commission now are allowed) and having to wait at some out of the way railway station as the water tank is refilled. Whether the man let that influence him - I don't know. Having worked in a software company I know how clients are pampered. I'm sure that is the case in any firm. Why? True, they don't give projects (or business) based on that - because it is a question of money. But what does Phukan have at stake? And what if the NDA had come back to power as widely expected? Couldn't he have expected some more quid pro quo?
There are also instances like sending the Tehelka tapes for forensic analysis (to determine if they were doctored) even tough his predecessor (Venkataswami) had done that twice and found the tapes genuine. Also, in most of the cases Phukan suggests internal probes though in each case. According to at least one actor - Tehelka - in this whole affair these are questionable.
I don't know if he let anything other than the truth guide him - that is the reason I did not post anything on this topic. But one thing is for sure - he should have been more discreet.
No comments:
Post a Comment