HOT TOPICS
SPOTLIGHT AGENCIES
Right to response in English
Written By murali772 - 17 May, 2010
Bangalore governance Transparency Analysis efficiency liberalisation inclusiveness
From over a year now, the responses from GoK officials to queries under RTI, are being made out only in Kannada, even when raised in English, and even when specifically requested to respond in English.
Now, though I can speak Kannada fairly fluently; I can't read or write the language (Questions as to why people like me haven't bothered to learn to read and write the language can be the subject of another blog; but, please do not bring it up here). However, even true-blue Kannadiga's, to whom I have been referring these official responses, have been having difficulty figuring out the specific nuances pertaining to the issues involved.
As such, I feel this is a strategy being adopted by the babu's largely to obfuscate and prevaricate on issues. And, it is certainly having its effects - like from over a year, I have not filed a single query, though I used to be quite a regular before.
In the light of all these, on the 1st of this year, I filed a query as under:
"Is a Karnataka state government official, irrespective of whichever office he/ she is attached to, bound by law to accord a response in English language, if a person raising a query with him/ her, under Right to Information Act, asks for the same?"
with both
1) The Additional Secretary, Opinion Division, Dept of Law, Ministry for Law & Parliamentary Affairs
2) Deputy Secretary (Establishment of Joint Secretary), Dept of Personnel & Administrative Reforms
Whereas, I was looking for a yes/ no response, what I have received (apparently from the person listed at sl no 2 above) turned out to be another attempt at obfuscation, stating that the Act does not make any reference to the matter.
I then represented to the Appellate authority stating additionally as below:
"My query was not limited to responses under the Right to Information Act. However, since there is no obligation to respond when a query is raised other than under the Act, I had specifically referred to queries raised under the Act. As such, the officials citing rules to under the Act to evade a direct answer was quite untenable".
But, with that also not evoking the right kind of response, I have now taken the matter to the Information Commissioner (on 16th April). I am yet to hear from his office, apart from the postal acknowledgement.
Meanwhile, the Dept of Law has been silent. I now propose to bring that also to the notice of the Information Commissioner. I am told it takes a bit of time.
If the answer had been NO, they would have said so straightaway. Very clearly therefore the answer has to be a YES. And, once I get that, I shall certainly put it to good use.
Muralidhar Rao
COMMENTS
idontspam - 22 December, 2010 - 03:05
and with my absenting myself, the order dismissing my appeal had been issued ex-parte,
Welcome to the club. In the internet & mobile phone era, what next, they will send by pegion? ...and say it flew away or got shot so the decision was made exparte!
murali772 - 11 July, 2010 - 11:55
I raised the following query under RTI with the Registrar of Societies, Karnataka:
Along with six of my associates, I am proposing to start a society, which I wish to register with you under the Karnataka Societies Act. On approaching various knowledgeable consultants in the matter, I have been told that you do not entertain applications for registration unless the entire connected set of documentation is made out in Kannada. Now, though five out of the seven of us are Kannadigas, even this lot is not totally comfortable in engaging in official dealings in Kannada, and, as such, we would like to have our entire set of documentation made out in English. Kindly confirm that you can facilitate the same. If you cannot, please advise the reasons, citing relevant sections of the law.
Within just about the one month's time, I received a response, totally in Kannada, citing a government note (copy of which was attached).
The government note essentially directs promotion of the usage of Kannada. But, the legal question proper remained un-addressed, and the Registrar of Societies chose to remain silent in the matter.
As such, I went on appeal to the Chief Information Commissioner (on 28th June) seeking his help in getting the appropriate response to my original query.
I am told there's a wait-list at the CIC's office, and it takes close to 3 to 4 months for a fresh case to be taken up. May be I need to tackle that separately.
Srivatsava - 13 July, 2010 - 17:27
Murali-sir,
This surely is not an isolated case. Its true with not just Kannadigas, but with pepole across the country.
Therefore, while commending your efforts about the right to response in English, may I suggest (and going a step ahead, offer any help) that you take up with the central goverment officials/politicains, who will have a say on the matter. How about writing to the Union law minister for a start, he can surely push for a 'mandate' to amend the RTI to enable seeking RTI response in English (or a second official language)
Bheema.Upadhyaya - 22 December, 2010 - 03:51
The best would be to ask in both languages in Kannada and English. Also you may ask Kannada and Hindi combination. Does the language really matter than issue itself? Its easy to get it translated, than asking GoK itself to do this extra job(we know GoK is implementing Kannada in hard way, though people/private companies are not implementing. See any ads in City, where Kannada letters are in 5% size of main ad font size) Thats my personal opinion , no offense meant though.
murali772 - 21 December, 2010 - 13:38
Last week, I called up Mr Ashok, Under Secretary, KIC, again ( I had been calling up every month) to check on the status of my appeal dated 16th April. Most surprisingly, he told me that they had already cleared all April appeals. On further checking, he informed that the summons had been issued to me on the 2nd Nov (by ordinary post), for the hearing on 3rd Dec, and with my absenting myself, the order dismissing my appeal had been issued ex-parte, and copy of the same posted to me (again by ordinary post) on the 10th Dec. When I asked how come the summons (as also the order) was sent by ordinary post, he responded saying 'that was their practice' (The order reached me last week, but the summons hasn't reached even upto now).
While I propose to be challenging this aspect saying that I was denied a fair hearing, the operative part of the dismissal order appears to base itself on the decision of the Goa bench of Bombay High Court in writ petition no 419 0f 2007 (in the case of Dr Celsa Pinto vs Goa State Information Commission), supposedly stating that 'question and clarification cannot be asked under RTI Act', my request supposedly being for 'nothing but clarification'.
I am now left to challenge this in the High Court. I'll first seek an opinion from a lawyer friend, practicing in the High Court, before going about it.
Also, I don't know if my appeal of 28th June, in the matter of the RoS (check above), will also suffer the same fate. But, there they can't go by the same argument, if my understanding is right.
Meanwhile, encouraged by the ToI report cited here, I decided to approach the National Advisory Council directly to seek redressal in the matter, since it is likely to be a country-wide issue. Let's see how things evolve.
PRAJA.IN COMMENT GUIDELINES
Posting Guidelines apply for comments as well. No foul language, hate mongering or personal attacks. If criticizing third person or an authority, you must be fact based, as constructive as possible, and use gentle words. Avoid going off-topic no matter how nice your comment is. Moderators reserve the right to either edit or simply delete comments that don't meet these guidelines. If you are nice enough to realize you violated the guidelines, please save Moderators some time by editing and fixing yourself. Thanks!