In what could be termed as new hope for complete transparency in Public-Private-Partnership projects, the National Highway Authority started uploading on its website www.nhai.org.in contents defined by the task force under Section 4 of RTI Act
Moneylife, has been campaigning for transparency in public-private-partnerships (PPPs) between the government and corporate bodies like Infosys, Reliance Infrastructure and Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) that have entered into crucial partnerships for public services like highways, roads, passports and electronic service delivery. This comes as a ray of hope with the Ministry of Road, Transport & Highways announcing complete transparency of NHAI projects.
The press release issued by the Press Information Bureau (PIB) on 3 June 2014, states, “National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) proposes to place all information relating to projects taken up by them under PPP mode in the public domain to be available on a link www.nhai.org.in.”
The information would include listings in the Section 4 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. This means, information regarding every bit of the PPP project, like copy of the agreement, details of every stage of the project, toll collection at toll plazas, accident statistics, internal correspondence regarding the project and so on would be put up on the website at regular intervals.
The press note elaborates, “specific project details can be obtained by typing the name of the particular stretch/ project implementation unit (PIU) along with this link. Most Project Specific Websites have already been launched and the remaining will be launched by 15 July 2014.”
“Details will be given about all stages of the project development like construction, operation and maintenance. Each PIU will have a separate link. Information for each project will include name of the Concessionaire, Independent Engineer and Safety Consultant, Project location details, location of Toll Plaza, availability of Ambulance and emergency telephone numbers of nearest Police Station, Trauma Centre etc.”
“The Concession Agreement between NHAI and the Concessionaire, and between NHAI and Independent Engineer (IE) / Safety Consultants will also be hosted on this website. Complete database of the correspondence exchanged between the IE and the Concessionaire, between NHAI and Independent Engineer on all aspects of the project, along with details of court cases and arbitration awards etc. will be uploaded on the website. Report of IE on important parameters like quality of construction, quality of maintenance, road safety and tolling, Correspondence between IE and the Concessionaire of these projects will also be available. In addition it will contain information, along with photographs, about the progress of work, major developments of the project including change of scope and change of alignment,” the release said.
NHAI has also opened on its website www.nhai.org.in an e-complaints section for commuters. The press release informs, “Road users and the general public can lodge their complaints, if any, directly on the website in the user friendly form. On uploading the form, email to the concerned officer in the PIU, IE and NHAI HQ will be sent and road users will be kept posted of the action taken on their complaints. Complaints received through letters, telephonically or on the Facebook page of NHAI will also be posted on the website. Redressal of these complaints done by NHAI / IE / Concessionaire will also be posted on the website. These websites with all information relating to PIUs are being registered with the leading search engines and can also be accessed through NHAI’s website.’’
Venkatesh Nayak, programme coordinator of Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), who has been a part of the Task Force set up by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) in 2011, comprising government and civil society organizations across the country termed this step by NHAI, “progressive”. He says, “These guidelines require disclosure of concessions agreements, maintenance manuals, all payments made, tolls collected and a wealth of other information about PPPs without waiting for any individual to make a formal request.’’
Nayak opines that now it is left to the citizens and activists to simplify the technical language in PPP agreements, ensure all other PPPs follow the NHAI route and ensure that information commissions refer to this new development while deciding appeals on non-transparency in PPPs.
I went through the NHAI website to check out the Pune-Satara project of the NHAI-Reliance Infra PPP on the construction, operations and maintenance of the deadly highway, which has flouted all norms of traffic safety, commuter safety and traffic engineering. While the agreement copy has been put up, we are looking forward to details of toll collection, accident statistics and constant updates. Let us give them a few weeks for adherence to the notification by the ministry.
You may also want to read...
Guidelines of information to be disclosed under Sec 4 of RTI
Act for PPP
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training
Subject: Implementation of suo motu disclosure under Section 4 of RTI Act, 2005 –
1. Issue of Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act lays down the information which should be disclosed by Public Authorities on a suo motu or proactive basis. Section 4(2) and Section 4(3) prescribe the method of dissemination of this information. The purpose of suo motu disclosures under Section 4 is to place large amount of information in public domain on a proactive basis to make the functioning of the Public Authorities more transparent and also to reduce the need for filing individual RTI applications.
2. Since the promulgation of the Act in 2005, large amount of information relating to functioning of the government is being put in public domain. However, the quality and quantity of proactive disclosure is not up to the desired level. It was felt that the weak implementation of the Section 4 of the RTI Act is partly due to the fact that certain provisions of this Section have not been fully detailed and, in case of certain other provisions there is need for laying down detailed guidelines. Further there is need to set up a compliance mechanism to ensure that requirements under section 4 of the RTI Act are
3. In order to address the above, Government of India constituted a Task Force on suo motu disclosure under the RTI Act, 2005 in May 2011 which included representatives of civil society organizations active in the field of Right to Information, for strengthening compliance with provisions for suo motu or proactive disclosure as given in Section 4 of the RTI Act, 2005. Based on the report of the Task Force, the Government have decided to issue guidelines for suo motu disclosure under section 4 of the RTI Act.
1.2 Public Private Partnerships
1.2.1 If Public services are proposed to be provided through a Public Private partnership (PPP), all information relating to the PPPs must be disclosed in the public domain by the Public Authority entering into the PPP contract/concession agreement. This may include details of the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV), if any set up, detailed project reports, concession agreements, operation and maintenance manuals and other documents generated as part of the implementation of the PPP project. The documents under the ambit of the exemption from disclosure of information under section 8(1)(d) and 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act would not be disclosed suo motu. Further, information about fees, tolls, or other kinds of revenue that may be collected under authorization from the Government, information in respect of outputs and outcomes, process of selection of the private sector party may also be proactively disclosed. All payments made under the PPP project may also be disclosed in a periodic manner along with the purpose of making such payment.
(Vinita Deshmukh is the consulting editor of Moneylife, an RTI activist and convener of the Pune Metro Jagruti Abhiyaan. She is the recipient of prestigious awards like the Statesman Award for Rural Reporting which she won twice in 1998 and 2005 and the Chameli Devi Jain award for outstanding media person for her investigation series on Dow Chemicals. She co-authored the book “To The Last Bullet - The Inspiring Story of A Braveheart - Ashok Kamte” with Vinita Kamte and is the author of “The Mighty Fall”.)
The Finance Ministry has issued a show-cause notice to troubled NSEL asking why exemptions granted to it in 2007 should not be withdrawn
The Finance Ministry has issued a show-cause notice to the National Spot Exchange Ltd (NSEL), which is engulfed in a Rs5,600-crore payment crisis. In the notice, the Ministry has asked why exemptions granted to NSEL in 2007 should not be withdrawn.
This is the second such notice to the spot commodity exchange promoted by Financial Technologies India Ltd. A similar notice was issued to NSEL by the Consumer Affairs Ministry in 2012.
The Consumer Affairs Ministry, which regulated spot exchanges until the NSEL crisis broke last year, had exempted the Exchange under Section 27 of the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act and allowed it to offer one-day forward contracts provided members do not resort to short sales.
“NSEL has received this letter from the Ministry of Finance. We are examining the letter and according to the deadline given, we will respond in 15 days’ time,” an NSEL spokesperson said.
“We understand from media reports that a similar letter has been issued to other spot exchanges as well. This letter does not discard the response given by NSEL regarding the show-cause notice issued in April 2012. The letter will be placed before the board for appropriate advice and next action,” the exchange said in a statement.
NSEL was hit by a Rs5,600-crore payment crisis after suspending trading on its platform on 31 July 2013. The Government had directed it to end trading on most contracts on the NSEL platform after violations to the exemptions were found.
In August last year, NSEL proposed a payout plan but it could not stick to the schedule and has not made a single successful payment.
Currently, several investigating agencies are probing the NSEL and some former top officials of the bourse have been arrested.
The Central Information Commission ruled that provisions of RTI Act also apply on private schools that are governed by law like Delhi Education Act or Right to Education Act
In a significant decision, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has held that provisions of the Right to Information (RTI) Act also apply on private schools, which are governed by a law such as the Delhi Education Act.
The case relates to a former employee of Jindal Public School, who filed an RTI application with the Directorate of Education, seeking a certified copy of service book and other details from her past employer.
The Directorate provided the information available with them but the school refused to furnish a reply saying that the RTI Act does not apply to it.
Directing the school to disclose information sought by its ex-employee, Information Commissioner Sridhar Acharyulu said the school is duty bound under sections 4 and 8 of Delhi Education Act, 1973 to abide by the regulatory conditions of service, payment of salaries as prescribed, for which school has to maintain records which provide an "inherent and implied" right to information to their employees.
"Under Right to Education Act 2009 also, the recognised school is under an obligation to appoint eligible teachers and provide them with prescribed wages. This also reveals that it has given inherent Right to Information to the teachers from their employers," he said.
The Commissioner said if the appellant in her capacity as ex-employee of the school has right to information under any legislation such as Delhi Education Act, that will fall under the purview of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act which gives PIO, Appellate Authority and the Information Commissioner power to enforce her right to information.
"Hence, the school is directed to discharge their obligation under law by furnishing the information sought by the appellant to the respondent authority (Directorate of Education), who in turn is directed to provide the same to the appellant," he said.
Click here to see the CIC order...
Appellant : Sadhana Dixit
Respondent : Directorate of Education, GNCTD, Delhi
Date of hearing : 19/05/2014
Date of decision : 29/05/2014
Information Commissioner : Prof M Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar)
Referred Sections : Sections 3, 19(3) of the RTI Act