RTI Amendment Bill: Why people can’t file suggestions, objections in languages other than Hindi, English?

The Parliamentary Committee has sought citizens’ suggestions on the RTI Amendment Bill, 2013. However, there seems to be a deliberate attempt by government to restrict responses to Hindi and English languages, thus depriving half of the population a chance to file their suggestions and objections

The latest two ordinances—one to protect Lalu Prasad Yadav from his mega fodder scam and the other to scuttle Supreme Court’s judgment on banning politicians who are convicted of a crime to contest—has further angered people of the brazenness with which these netas are indulging in lawlessness.

 

The Right to Information (RTI) Amendment Bill, 2013 which aims to keep political parties out of the RTI ambit was also meant to be passed quickly in the Parliament as the netas would have liked it to be, met a hurdle thanks to a vociferous nation-wide campaign by RTI activists and citizens. The Bill was sent to a Parliamentary Committee.

 

Shantaram Naik, who heads the Committee, has called for opinions and suggestions from citizens and organizations, through an advertisement on 21 September. The suggestions could be sent by post within 15 days of the release of the advertisement, which is 6 October, or in person. The Committee will ask those citizens, organizations and stakeholders who would like to orally put forth their say, to be present personally at a particular date.

 

However, after the Parliament has bowed down to citizen pressure and sent the amendment bill to a Parliamentary Standing Committee, there seems to be an attempt to get ‘poor’ response. Also, there seems to be confusion on the connotation of transparency for a political party. In order that individuals do not send meaningless suggestions, various RTI organizations are working towards making a well-studied draft. Aruna Roy, one of the pioneers of the RTI Act, who has steered this campaign is holding a meeting of members of National Campaign for People's Right to Information (NCPRI) to draft the suggestions tomorrow and will release it. 

 

The other serious concern is that the Parliamentary Standing Committee has curiously asked citizens, through its advertisement, to “send your comments by email or by post (two copies must be sent) only in English or Hindi.’’ 

 

Venkatesh Nayak, who has picked up cudgels for the people on this campaign through Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) vehemently, states this has been deliberately done to limit the number of suggestions. He said, “The Constitution gives official recognition to 21 languages other than Hindi in the Eighth Schedule. The number of persons speaking languages other than Hindi easily outnumbers people who are primarily Hindi-speakers. According to the 2001 Census data only 41% of the citizens in India speak Hindi. A little more than 10% of the citizenry is familiar with English as a primary or secondary language. These statistics imply, close to one half of the population will be prevented from making submissions on the RTI Amendment Bill merely because of the language barrier.’’

 

Also, advertisements calling for these suggestions have also been restricted to these two languages only. Nayak argues that if public consultation on this issue is to be genuine and effective, then, “advertisements for submissions on the RTI (Amendment) Bill, 2013 must be published in the leading newspapers of all states in the local official languages; citizens must be informed of their right to submit views and comments on this Bill in any of the 22 languages recognised in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution; translating the advertisement into the 22 official languages and translating back the submissions received from the people into the English and Hindi for the MPs on the Committee is not a difficult task for the Rajya Sabha Secretariat. They have a team of professional translators who provide simultaneous translation of speeches of members of Parliament (MPs) in every session. These people could be gainfully employed when Parliament is in recess.’’

 

So, is the Parliamentary fraternity, making a hoax of public consultations?

 

It may be recalled that the Right to Information (Amendment) Bill, aims to keep political parties out of the ambit of the RTI Act and nullify the June 2013 decision of the Central Information Commission (CIC). The CIC has ordered that all six national political parties are public authorities and should immediately appoint Public Information Officers (PIOs) and Appellate Authorities (AAs). All the political parties came together to scuttle it

 

Venkatesh Nayak’s views on limiting suggestions from public

 

Language of submissions:

 

It is most unfortunate that the Parliamentary Committee vetting the RTI Amendment Bill permits submissions to be made only in English and Hindi on such an important issue which affects every citizen of India. There are at least four problems with this blinkered approach.

 

First, the Constitution gives official recognition to 21 languages other than Hindi in the Eighth Schedule. The number of persons speaking languages other than Hindi easily outnumbers people who are primarily Hindi-speakers. According to the 2001 Census data only 41% of the citizens in India speak Hindi. A little more than 10% of the citizenry is familiar with English as a primary or secondary language. These statistics imply, close to one half of the population will be prevented from making submissions on the RTI Amendment Bill merely because of the language barrier.

 

Second, when Electronic Voting Machines mention names of candidates in English and the local official language of the State for the purpose of elections to Parliament, is there any justification for limiting submissions to the Parliamentary Committee to two languages only? If languages are important only for the purpose of electing MPs but not for collecting their views about making or amending laws to inform these very MPs can India claim to be a true democracy where everybody has equal space and opportunity for participating in the law-making processes?

 

Third, many members of the Parliamentary Committee (see 2nd attachment) are themselves elected from or live in States where neither Hindi nor English is spoken by a majority of the citizens. Yet, there is no record in the public domain of any of these MPs demanding that opportunities be created for their brothers and sisters to send their comments on such an important issue in the official language(s) of the State.

 

Fourth, Article 350 of the Constitution gives every citizen the right to make representations to any authority of the Central or State Government in any of the official languages used at the Central or State level. The Parliamentary Committee must recognise and honour this important constitutional principle in the context of making or amending laws and create opportunities for people to send their comments on the RTI Amendment Bill (3rd attachment) in any of the languages recognised in the Eighth Schedule.

 

How can this inequality of opportunity be remedied?

 

It is high time MPs raised the issue of equality of people's access to the Committee's proceedings in terms of official languages used in India. The Committee has a constitutional duty to take the following steps to ensure equality of access to all citizens who wish to submit their opinion about whether political parties should or should not be covered by the RTI Act:

 

1) Advertisements for submissions on the RTI (Amendment) Bill 2013 must be published in the leading newspapers of all States in the local official languages;

 

2) Citizens must be informed of their right to submit views and comments on this Bill in any of the 22 languages recognised in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution.

 

3) The present time limit of 15 days for sending comments must be extended to at least 30 days to enable people to send their comments in various languages after holding local level consultations.

 

4) Translating the advertisement into the 22 official languages and translating back the submissions received from the people into the English and Hindi for the MPs on the Committee is not a difficult task for the Rajya Sabha Secretariat. They have a team of professional translators who provide simultaneous translation of speeches of MPs in every Parliament session. These people could be gainfully employed when Parliament is in recess.

 

What you can do to expand the consultation opportunity for all citizens:

I urge you to SMS the following message to the Chairperson of the Parliamentary Committee- Mobile No.: 09422439990

 

"Please take all necessary steps to enable people to send their comments on the RTI Amendment Bill, 2013 in all 22 languages recognised by our Constitution."

 

This message is less than 160 characters long. The cost little of sending one SMS from any part of India, is very less.

 

Or you may send a post card, fax, or email with your message to:

 

The Chairperson,

Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice

Rajya Sabha Secretariat, #222, 2nd Floor, Parliament House Annexe; New Delhi- 110 001

Email address: [email protected]; Fax: 011-23016784

 

Or you may send the SMS or postcards, fax or email to all MPs on the Committee.

 

Please remember to copy your emails and messages to me.

 

Access to Information Programme

Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative

B-117, 1st Floor, Sarvodaya Enclave

New Delhi- 110 017

Tel: +91-11-43180201/ 9871050555

Fax: +91-11-26864688

Website: www.humanrightsinitiative.org

 

 

STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS IN THE RTI AMENDMENT BILL, 2013:

 

The Right to Information Act, 2005 was enacted by the Government for setting out a framework for effectuating the right to information for citizens and 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.

 

2. The Central Information Commission in one of its decision dated 03.06.2013 has held that the political parties namely AICC/INC, BJP, CPI (M), CPI, NCP and BSP are public authorities under section 2(h) of the said Act. The Government considers that the CIC has made a liberal interpretation of section 2(h) of the said Act in its decision. The political parties are neither established nor constituted by or under the Constitution or by any other law made by Parliament. Rather, they are registered or recognised under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the rules/orders made or issued thereunder.

 

3. It has also been observed that there are already provisions in the Representation of the People Act, 1951 as well as in the Income-tax Act, 1961 which deals with the transparency in the financial aspects of political parties and their candidates.
 

4. Declaring a political party as public authority under the RTI Act would hamper its smooth internal working, which is not the objective of the said Act and was not envisaged by Parliament under the RTI Act. Further, the political rivals may misuse the provisions of RTI Act, thereby adversely affecting the functioning of the political parties.
 

5. In view of above, the Government has decided to amend the RTI Act to keep the political parties out of the purview of the RTI Act, with a view to remove the adverse effects of the said decision of the CIC. It is also necessary to give retrospective effect to the proposed amendment with effect from the date of the said decision of CIC, that is, 3rd day of June, 2013.

 

Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

Vallish Kumar S

6 years ago

Here is a petition to demand equality for all Indian languages.

chn.ge/17S72rs

A Soorianarayanan

6 years ago

But Mr venkatesh Nayak;s e-mail address is not given? How to send copy of e-mail send to him?

Jitendra Gupta

6 years ago

CM of Maharashtra, Chairman Tata Group: How Tata's Own/possess 8 natural lakes in Pune against constitution without auction or Profit sharing with State ?http://www.change.org/en-IN/petitions/cm...

Jitendra Gupta

6 years ago

https://http://www.change.org/en-IN/petitions/honourabl...

REPLY

Jitendra Gupta

In Reply to Jitendra Gupta 6 years ago

Honourable President of India: Art. 86(2) prevent SC order on criminals politicians, CIC order RTI on Political. partieshttp://www.change.org/en-IN/petitions/cm...

Are public authorities following suo motu disclosure norms under Section 4 of RTI Act?

In order to reduce the number of individual RTI applications, Department of Personnel & Training-DoPT, has issued fresh guidelines to public authorities to suo motu publish all information as required under Section 4 of the RTI Act, based on a taskforce report. But does any public authority care?

Four months after the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) issued fresh guidelines to public authorities to abide by the suo motu disclosure under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the implementation seems questionable going by the general indifference of Public Information Officers (PIOs). This would have strengthened compliance with provisions for proactive disclosure as given in Section 4 of the RTI Act.

 

The government had appointed a Task Force comprising leading RTI activists of the Civil Society in 2011. Based on the report, the DoPT has directed all public authorities to strictly abide by the norms. The office memorandum to all public authorities states, “…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.”

 

Citing that 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 because 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 met.”

 

The guidelines issued by DoPT on 15 April 2013 include posting of information on websites too. Interestingly, all government departments have to mandatorily include a chapter on RTI Act compliance. The memo states, “Government has issued directions to all Ministries/ Departments to include a chapter on RTI Act in their Annual Reports submitted to the Parliament. Details about compliance with proactive disclosure guidelines should mandatorily be included in the relevant chapter in Annual Report of Ministry/Department.’’

 

Every public authority has been asked to do an audit report and the respective ministry has been asked to monitor it.

 

Following are the rules that should have been implemented by all public authorities:

 

Procurement made by Public Authorities:

publication of notice/tender enquiries, corrigenda thereon, and details of bid awards detailing the name of the supplier of goods/services being procured or the works contracts entered or any such combination of these and the rate and total amount at which such procurement or works contract is to be done should be disclosed.

 

Public Private Partnerships

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. 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.

 

Transfer Policy and Transfer Orders

Transfer policy for different grades/cadres of employees serving in Public Authority should be proactively disclosed. All transfer orders should be publicized through the website or in any other manner listed in Section 4(4) of the Act. These guidelines would not be applicable in cases of transfers made keeping in view sovereignty, integrity, security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State and the exemptions covered under Section 8 of the Act. These instructions would not apply to security and intelligence organizations under the second schedule of the RTI Act.

 

RTI Applications

All Public Authorities shall proactively disclose RTI applications and appeals received and their responses, on the websites maintained by Public Authorities with search facility based on key words. RTI applications and appeals received and their responses relating to the personal information of an individual may not be disclosed, as they do not serve any public interest.

 

Citizens Charter

As part of the Result Framework Document of the department/organization should be proactively disclosed and six monthly report on the performance against the benchmarks set in Citizens Charter should also be displayed on the website of public authorities.

 

Discretionary and Non-discretionary grants

All discretionary /non-discretionary grants/ allocations to state governments/ NGOs/Other institutions by Ministry/Department should be placed on the website of the Ministry/ Department concerned. Annual Accounts of all legal entities who are provided grants by Public Authorities should be made available through publication, directly or indirectly on the Public Authority’s website.

         

Foreign Tours of PM/Ministers

A large number of RTI queries are being filed on official tours undertaken by Ministers or officials of various Government Ministries/Departments. Information regarding the nature, place and period of foreign and domestic tours of Prime Minister are already disclosed on the PMO’s website. As per DoPT’s OM No. 1/8/2012-IR dated 11/9/2012, Public Authorities may proactively disclose the details of foreign and domestic official tours undertaken by the Minister(s) and officials of the rank of Joint Secretary to the Government of India and above and Heads of Departments, since 1st January, 2012. The disclosures may be updated once every quarter.

Information to be disclosed proactively may contain nature of the official tour, places visited, the period, number of people included in the official delegation and total cost of such travel undertaken

 

Guidelines for digital publication of proactive disclosure under Section 4

Section 4 lays down that information should be provided through many mediums depending upon the level of the public authority and the recipient of information (for example, in case of Panchayat, wall painting may be more effective means of dissemination of information), and that more and more proactive disclosure would gradually be made through Internet. There is need for more clear guidelines for web-based publication of information for disclosure

It should be the endeavour of all public authorities that all entitlements to citizens and all transactions between the citizen and government are gradually made available through computer based interface. The ‘Electronic Delivery of Services Bill, 2012’under formulation in Government of India would provide the necessary impetus.

Websites should contain detailed information from the point of origin to the point of delivery of entitlements/services provided by the Public Authorities to citizens

Orders of the public authority should be uploaded on the website immediately after they have been issued

Website should contain all the relevant Acts, Rules, forms and other documents which are normally accessed by citizens

Each Ministry/Public Authority shall ensure that these guidelines are fully operationalized within a period of 6 months from the date of their issue

Proactive disclosure as per these guidelines would require collating a large quantum of information and digitizing it. Ministries/Public Authorities may engage consultants or outsource such work to expeditiously comply with these guidelines. For this purpose, the plan/non-plan funds of that department may be utilized

Each Ministry/ Public Authority should get its proactive disclosure package audited by third party every year. The audit should cover compliance with the proactive disclosure guidelines as well as adequacy of the items included in the package. The audit should examine whether there are any other types of information which could be proactively disclosed. Such audit should be done annually and should be communicated to the Central Information Commission annually through publication on their own websites. All Public Authorities should proactively disclose the names of the third party auditors on their website

For carrying out third party audit through outside consultants also, ministries/Public Authorities should utilize their plan/non-plan funds. The Central Information Commission should examine the third-party audit reports for each Ministry/Public Authority and offer advice/recommendations to the concerned Ministries/ Public Authorities.

Central Information Commission should carry out sample audit of few of the Ministries/ Public Authorities each year with regard to adequacy of items included as well as compliance of the Ministry/Public Authority with these guidelines.

 

For more details, visit: www.cic.gov.in

 

(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”)

Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

Deepak Gupta

6 years ago

I have query-

Is there a way senior officials of these bodies/authorities be prosecuted (via PILs) for negligence in fulfilling their lawful obligations?

The prosecution itself needs not be under RTI laws - it just provides the obligations on the public authority in this case. As long as there is no specific exemption for nonfulfilment of obligations under section 4.

Mahesh Khanna

6 years ago

Instead it is become fashion of CPIO's to simply say that information is not available or take shelter Under sec 8 (1)(e)(j) and refuse to provide information.

The story of filing online RTI is only getting happier

After several weeks of disgust over political parties trying to slip out of the RTI Act, good news beckons for citizens in India and abroad who want to file RTI online

Do you want to seek information under Right to Information (RTI) about public distribution of grains or demand a copy of your answer sheet in your Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) examination or seek details about a water conservation project of a gram panchayat, at the click of the mouse? Now, the Department of Food Supplies and Distribution, UPSC and the Ministry of Panchayati Raj—in fact 37 ministries or departments of the central government—have opened up the facility to file RTI online (see PDF at end of this piece for the list of the 37 ministries/ departments). The circular issued by the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) under the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, on 30 July 2013, had claimed that by August 2013, all ministries and central government departments would have the online RTI filing facility. But that is yet to materialise. Despite this convenience that will further strengthen and make the use of RTI easy, there has been no awareness of the programs by the government.
 

In order that the Central Public Information Officers (CPIOs) and Appellate Authorities (AA) who are the first contact points for RTI applicants, the circular recommended that, “It is again requested that training to all the CPIOs and First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) may be provided by the concerned Ministry/ Department, through the officials trained by DoPT or National Informatics Centre (NIC). If required, further training can be provided by DoPT or NIC, on the request of the concerned Ministry/ Department. User name/ password to all the CPIOs and FAAs are to be provided by RTI Nodal Officers of the concerned Ministry/ Department. It is imperative that the RTI Nodal Officers update the details of CPIOs/ FAAs in the system and issue user name and password to them at the earliest.’’
 

As for Indians residing abroad, thanks to the persistent efforts of noted RTI activist Commodore Lokesh Batra (retd.) since last five years, now 2,639 public authorities in Indian missions abroad, are open for online RTI applications along with fees via e-IPO. They cover various central government departments and ministries. Batra is also campaigning for availability of e-IPO facility for those residing in India too.
 

States Batra, “I sent 130 emails to Indian Missions  between 19th to 24th August by searching their email ids in this link. As on 24 August 2013; I found 37 of the total 125 Missions (30%) have indicated e-IPO information on their website. During this process, I noticed the poor quality of information posted on RTI links on websites of majority of Missions. While many others have done a good job, searching RTI link within the website of Missions is itself is a job. I feel all of them should display the RTI link on HOME page of each Mission's website.’’
 

Following is a sample of the emails Batra sent, reflecting his relentless efforts towards making use of RTI, cyber savvy. This one is to the deputy chief of mission, Vietnam and crisply contains the backdrop of his campaign and its fruition:
 

From: Lokesh Batra [email protected]

To: Vietnam- Deputy Chief of Mission ; HOC ; Counsellor [email protected]

Cc: "[email protected]"

Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 10:01 PM

Subject: Fm.Commodore Lokesh Batra: Creating awareness among ‘Indian Citizens’ abroad’ regarding facility of eIPO Payment of RTI Fee in FE, under RTI Act, 2005

 23 August 2013

 To,

The Central Public information Officers (CPIOs)

Indian Missions / Posts

 

 Sub: Creating awareness among ‘Indian Citizens’ abroad’ regarding facility of eIPO for Payment of RTI Fee in FE, under RTI Act, 2005

 

 Dear Madam/Sir,

 1. I am writing to draw your attention to the MOIA and MEA circular letters on the subject “Creating awareness among ‘Indian Citizens’ abroad’ regarding facility of eIPO for payment of RTI Fee in FE, under RTI Act, 2005”.

2. The details of two circular letters are as follow:

(a) MOIA circular letter F.NO.OI.11016/22/2013-FS dated 23 July 2013 and

(b) MEA circular letter No.RTI/558/01/2012 dated 02 August 2013.

3. The Government of India on 22 March 2013 had launched ‘Electronic Indian Postal Order’ (more known as e-IPO) to facilitate payment of RTI fee from abroad in FE by the Indian Citizens’ abroad.

4. Though it has been 05 months since the government facilitated e-IPO as mode of payment of RTI Fee by ‘Indian Citizens’ abroad’; I have not seen this information being disseminated on your mission’s website.

5. The website of Indian Embassy in Moscow has already included this information in their RTI link as below: http://www.indianembassy.ru/index.php/en/embassy/right-to-information  

6. I humbly request you to implement the directions contained in the MOIA and MEA circulars respectively, in letter and spirit. MOIA & MEA letters attached.

 

Yours’ Sincerely,

[Commodore Lokesh K Batra (Retd.)]

Social & RTI Activist

BringChangeNow

H-02, Sector-25, Jalvayu Vihar, Noida-201301, INDIA

 

Steered by Batra, hundreds of Indians living abroad had joined in his campaign. Unarguably, efforts for online RTI application and payment have been achieved single-handedly by Batra. For earlier stories, see these links:

2013 wakes up to online payment of RTI applications for Indians abroad

Near victory for Indians abroad for filing online RTI applications

 


 

SrNo

Mission

eIPO link

Remarks

1

Afghanistan

No

 

2

Algiers

No

 

3

Angola

No

 

4

Argentina

No

 

5

Armenia

No

 

6

Australia

No

 

7

Austria

No

 

8

Azerbaijan

Yes

(But no RTI Link)

9

Bahrain

No

 

10

Bangladesh

No

 

11

Belarus

No

 

12

Belgium

Yes

 

13

Bhutan

Yes

 

14

Botswana

 

No RTI Link seen

15

Brazil

No

 

16

Brunei Darussalam

No

 

17

Bulgaria

Yes

 

18

Cambodia

No

 

19

Canada

Yes

 

20

Chile

Yes

 

21

China

Yes

 

22

Colombia

Yes

 

23

Congo

No

 

24

Ivory Coast

No

No RTI Link seen

25

Croatia

Yes

 

26

Cuba

No

 

27

Cyprus

Yes

 

28

Czech Republic

Yes

 

29

Denmark

No

 

30

Egypt

 

Website not opening

31

Ethiopia

No

 

32

Fiji

No

 

33

Finland

 

RTI link: Blank

34

France

Yes

 

35

Germany

Yes

 

36

Ghana

No

eIPO info under announcement

37

Greece

No

 

38

Guatemala

No

 

39

Guyana

No

 

40

Hungary

No

No RTI Link seen

41

Iceland

Yes

 

42

Indonesia

No

 

43

Iran

No

 

44

Iraq

 

Web Site link not available

45

Ireland

Yes

 

46

Israel

 

Website not opening

47

Italy

No

 

48

Jamaica

No

 

49

Japan

Yes

 

50

Jordan

No

 

51

Kazakhstan

No

 

52

Kenya

No

 

53

Korea (DPR)

 

Web Site link not available

54

Korea (ROK) Seoul

No

 

55

Kuwait

Yes

 

56

Kyrgyzstan

No

 

57

Laos

Yes

 

58

Lebanon

No

 

59

Libya

No

 

60

Madagascar

 

RTI Link still under construction

61

Malaysia

Yes

 

62

Maldives

Yes

 

63

Mali

Yes

 

64

Mauritius

No

 

65

Mexico

No

 

66

Mongolia

No

 

67

Morocco

No

 

68

Mozambique

No

 

69

Myanmar

No

 

70

Namibia

No

 

71

Nepal

No

No RTI Link seen

72

Netherlands

No

 

73

New Zealand

Yes

 

74

Niger

 

RTI Link has no Info

75

Nigeria

No

 

76

Norway

No

 

77

Oman

Yes

 

78

Pakistan

No

 

79

Palestine

No

 

80

Panama

No

 

81

Papua New Guinea

No

 

82

Peru

No

 

83

Philippines

No

 

84

Poland

No

 

85

Portugal

No

 

86

Qatar

No

 

87

Romania

Yes

 

88

Russia

Yes

 

89

Saudi Arabia

Yes

 

90

Senegal

 

Website not opening

91

Serbia

Yes

 

92

Seychelles

No

 

93

Singapore

Yes

 

94

Slovak Republic

Yes

At the bottom of RTI Link

95

Slovenia

No

 

96

South Africa

No

 

97

South Sudan

 

Web Site link not available

98

Spain

Yes

 

99

Sri Lanka

Yes

 

100

Sudan

No

 

101

Suriname

No

 

102

Sweden

Yes

 

103

Switzerland

 

Website not opening

104

Syria

No

 

105

Tajikistan

No

 

106

Tanzania

No

 

107

Thailand

Yes

 

108

Trinidad & Tobago

No

 

109

Tunisia

Yes

 

110

Turkey

Yes

 

111

Turkmenistan

 

Web Site link not available

112

Uganda

No

 

113

Ukraine

No

 

114

United Arab Emirates

No

 

115

United Kingdom

Yes

 

116

United States of America

Yes

 

117

UN-PMI (CD) Geneva

No

 

118

UN-PMI (Geneva)

No

 

119

UN-PMI (New York)

No

 

120

Uzbekistan

No

 

121

Venezuela

No

 

122

Vietnam

No

 

123

Yemen

No

No RTI Link seen

124

Zambia

No

No RTI Link seen

125

Zimbabwe

No

No RTI Link seen (Only RTI Act Link available)

Compiled by: Commodore Lokesh Batra (Retd.)

 

(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”)


 

Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

nagesh kini

6 years ago

Thanks Vinita for this vital piece of information that will go to make RTI applications much more simpler for the common man.
Sending the amendment to a Select Committee is just another way of putting it on the back burner - an exercise not to antagonize the educated voter who has been fed the info that RTI is a 'aam admi ke sath, congress ka hath' phenomenon!

nagesh kini

6 years ago

Thanks Vinita for this vital piece of information that will go to make RTI applications much more simpler for the common man.
Sending the amendment to a Select Committee is just another way of putting it on the back burner - an exercise not to antagonize the educated voter who has been fed the info that RTI is a 'aam admi ke sath, congress ka hath' phenomenon!

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

online financial advisory
Pathbreakers
Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
online financia advisory
The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Online Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
financial magazines online
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
financial magazines in india
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)