1. R IGHT T O I NFORMATION A CT

2. W HAT IS R IGHT T O I NFORMATION A CT ? An act that provides Indian citizens the opportunity to request for information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the Indian administrative system.

3. B ACKGROUND Official Secrets Act 1889 Freedom of Information Act 2002 The Right to Information Act - October, 2005.

4. K EY U NITS Information seeker – Citizen of India Information Commissions – Responsible for implementing the RTI act. Has both State and central divisions. PIO – represents information commission in PA and is responsible for collecting applications and delivering info. PA – Public Authority First Appellate (FA) – Mediates disputes between applicants and PA. Each Public Authority has one First Appellate.

5. H OW IT WORKS ? Any citizen may request information from a "public authority” which is required to reply expeditiously or within thirty days Applicant approaches PIO (public information officer) with the application form which costs 10 rupees. The reply is to be given within 30 days of receipt. If life of any person is involved, the PIO is expected to reply within 48 hours.

6. W HEN CAN AN APPLICANT APPEAL ? Applicant can appeal to first appellate if Information not provided within 30days. Not satisfied by the info provided Not satisfied by the refusal to provide info. First appeal to be made before 30days after initial one month. Appellate has to reply within one month. If still not provided– Second Appeal Second Appellate – Central Information Commission Second Appeal – Can appeal within 90 days

7. K EY ISSUES Demand side Supply side Adjudicatory side

8. K EY ISSUES FACED (D EMAND S IDE ) Low public awareness Quality of awareness Constraints faced in filing applications Poor quality of information provided

9. L OW PUBLIC AWARENESS

10. C ONSTRAINTS FACED IN FILING APPLICATIONS Inconvenient payment channels for submission of application fees. Inconvenient submission channels for RTI application Standard forms for RTI application Non-availability of User Guides for RTI implementation for information seekers Lack of assistance in filing the application Non-friendly attitude of the PIOs

11. N ON - AVAILABILITY OF U SER G UIDES FOR RTI IMPLEMENTATION FOR INFORMATION SEEKERS Standard forms for RTI application and replies

12. P OOR QUALITY OF INFORMATION PROVIDED

13. K EY ISSUES FACED (S UPPLY S IDE ) Failure to provide information within 30 days Inadequate trained PIOs and First Appellate Authorities Obsolete record management Guidelines Non-availability of basic Infrastructure Lack of motivation among PIOs Ineffective implementation of Section 4(1) (b)

14. I NADEQUATE TRAINED PIO S AND F IRST A PPELLATE A UTHORITIES

15. O BSOLETE RECORD MANAGEMENT G UIDELINES

16. N ON - AVAILABILITY OF BASIC I NFRASTRUCTURE

17. L ACK OF MOTIVATION AMONG PIO S

18. I NEFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF S ECTION 4(1) ( B ) Proactive disclosure – Online publishing of information.

19. K EY I SSUES FACED (A DJUDICATORY S IDE ) SIC Annual reports Perception of being “lenient” towards PIOs High level of pendency Geographical spread of the Information Commissions

20. SIC A NNUAL REPORTS

21. P ERCEPTION OF BEING “ LENIENT ” TOWARDS PIO S

22. H IGH LEVEL OF PENDENCY

23. G EOGRAPHICAL SPREAD OF THE I NFORMATION C OMMISSIONS Majority of the Information Commissions are situated in the State capitals, which results in appellants undergoing an additional cost in order to attend the hearings The benefits of setting up regional offices far outweigh the initial capital costs involved in setting them up.

24. A CCESS TO I NFORMATION A CT, C ANADA

25. K EY O BSERVATIONS Canada – Proactive Disclosure (Online Publishing). Responsibility of PA versus Fed Gov in Canada. Implementation of record management practices in India - “the problem of record keeping is too significant to be left to a Public Authority” Federal Government is responsible for collecting statistics. While in India the Information commission is responsible for collecting but faces resource constraints

26. F EDERAL TRANSPARENCY & ACCESS TO I NFORMATION L AW, M EXICO

27. K EY O BSERVATIONS - Mexico – More Capacity Building at an administrative level than India. Departments are better structured. Record Keeping and coordination is done by PA while the same is done by Info Committee in Mexico. Online filing system in Mexico.

28. C ONCLUSION Progressive step towards transparency Focus on key issues Improve internal processes Increase awareness