Government departments as RTI defaulters

It is sad that as many as eight departments of the Government of Assam have failed to submit their reports under Section 25(2) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, to the Assam Information Commission, despite several reminders on the matter. While this piece of information has been revealed in a news-item published on the front page of the Sunday edition of this newspaper on the basis of the Information Commission’s annual report for 2022-23, it also reflects on the irresponsible attitude of the eight departments against which the Commission has recommended suitable action for their failure to comply with the statutory provisions under Section 25(2) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. It is also dismaying to find that in addition to these eight departments which have failed to comply fully with their submission of reports, twelve other departments have been also pulled up for submitting only partial reports, without covering all the public authorities under these departments. It is pertinent to note that Section 25(2) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 states that each ministry or department must collect and provide information to the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, and this information is used to prepare reports and comply with requirements. The eight departments incidentally also includes the Home Department, apart from the Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, Border Protection and Development Department, Cooperation Department, Information Technology Department, Revenue & Disaster Management Department, Social Justice & Empowerment Department, and Tribal Affairs (Plains) Department. It has been reported time and again that a section of bureaucrats have continued to consider RTI applications, and for matter the RTI Act itself in a very casual manner, knowing it fully well that right to information is a fundamental right and information sought under provisions of the RTI Act cannot be denied unless such information are expressly restricted from being shared by the Act or by a court of law. It is also very disturbing to note that even as the Assam Information Commission has in the past few years made an all-out effort to orient officers at both the state level and the district level on speedy and time-bound disposal of RTI queries, a section of bureaucrats have continued to take an indifferent attitude. That proper application of provisions of the RTI Act can work wonders has been proved time again, and it was only recently that a prominent office bearer of the Assam College Teachers’ Association (ACTA) was placed under suspension after information provided to an RTI applicant revealed that he had not only failed to remain present in college, but had also illegally engaged a private person to take classes on his behalf.