SAIL hauled up for decision to buy Reddy-owned firm

The story was first published in DNA on February 19, 2013.

By Gangadhar S Patil Mumbai: Expressing concern over the decision of the state-run Steel Authority of India (SAIL) to acquire former Karnataka minister G Janardhan Reddy-promoted Brahmani Steel Ltd(BIL), a parliamentary standing committee has hauled up the ministry of steel for not conducting any investigation before submitting expression of interest as BIL had taken huge loans from banks and had legal disputes. In March 2012, Union steel minister Beni Prasad Verma informed Parliament that SAIL in September 2011 registered its interest with the Andhra Pradesh government for acquiring BIL, which is mired in controversy in connection with YS Jaganmohan Reddy’s disproportionate assets case. The company was allotted 14,700 acres of land for iron ore mining in Kadapa district by the then chief minister YS Rajasekhara Reddy in May 2007 for setting up a steel plant with an investment of Rs 4,430 crore. The committee found that the PSU was jumping into the mining sector without conducting any investigation or finding if the company was engaged in any criminal litigation. However, SAIL, in its official response, said it had only registered its preliminary interest with the government of Andhra Pradesh, to seek its views formally. Had a formal confirmation come from the AP government, due diligence exercise would definitely have been carried out. Otherwise the exercise would have been seen as an avoidable exercise. The PSU contended that the main objective of the takeover was to ensure raw material security as it was learnt that BIL had 100 MT of iron ore reserve. But rejecting it, the standing committee recommended a proper investigation before any offer is made, which was accepted by both the ministry and SAIL. Replying to a query on the huge loans that BIL have taken, SAIL officials said this question needs to be answered by the Andhra Pradesh government as SAIL has not had any direct dealing with BIL. “At no point has SAIL either committed or suggested to take over the liabilities of the company.” Though it has been more than a year since SAIL expressed its interest, there has no response from the Andhra Pradesh government so far, the officials said. gangadharpb@gmail.com

Cost of Truth - Rs 250 Cr

BEML responds to Tatra Trucks scam; threatens to file Rs 250 Cr defamation case

Dear DNA Chief Editor & Publisher

Please refer to your email dated 23rd August 2011 addressed to our CMD with copy marked to the undersigned seeking certain clarifications.

02. In this connection, we wish to point out that your newspaper has not responded so far to the letter no.PR/09/11 dated 27th July 2011 of our PR department.  In the said letter,  we requested you to publish our factual version in a prominent manner in your newspaper in front/first page within three days from the date of receipt of the letter.  Almost after a month you are now seeking certain clarifications rather in a casual fashion.

03. We also have to point out that on 4th August 2011, the JUST LAW, our advocates have issued a legal notice on the same issue to Diligent Media Corporation Ltd, the Editor in Chief, Printer and Publisher  and the Resident Editor requiring them to tender an unconditional public apology to BEML for publishing the false and baseless reports on 22nd, 23rd and  24th July 2011 and issue a letter to BEML regretting the publication of the above said false reports within seven days from the date of receipt of the notice. The legal notice further states that in the event of failure to comply the persons on whom the notices have been served, shall be liable to pay BEML a sum of Rs. 250 Crores towards the damages suffered by BEML on account of your false, malicious and defamatory report published. Till now, there has been no response to the said legal notice nor any publication has been made as sought for.

04. In light of the above position, instead of furnishing intermittent and piecemeal reply to your queries sought in your above said email dated 23rd August 2011 or other queries you may have or ask for, we propose to invite you and your DNA Investigations Bureau Team to visit our manufacturing plant producing Engine of TATRA on TOT and also to other factory  producing BEML TATRA Trucks  to prove it  to you and your team and to establish our stand and claim that substantial indigenization has been done and only a few critical components are imported to build BEML TATRA Trucks.  

During the visit proposed, we will organize a press meet with your team and other National Press / Media reporters will also be invited wherein we are willing to provide any information or documentation or clarification that you may need on the subject and to completely clear your doubts including the ones asked for in your email dated 23rd August 2011.  This is proposed with a view to ensure that the whole issue is clarified once and for all to you and the national press so that the whole country can report the
same appropriately for the benefit of the public at large.

05. Please send in a line of confirmation for participating in the above program so that BEML can organize the same on a convenient date and invite all of you along with other National Press / Media reporters.

Regards


--
Thanks
B S Sridhar
Dy General Manager(PR)
BEML Limited
BEML Soudha, 23/1, 4th Main
S.R.Nagar
BANGALORE - 560 027
Ph   : 080-22224457
Fax : 080-22963164

CVC enquires into Rs 200 crore frauds by Kinetic Group

Gangadhar S Patil

Mumbai: The central vigilance commission (CVC) has ordered a probe into alleged misuse of Rs200 crore by a subsidiary of Kinetic group companies eight years back.

Kinetic Finance Limited (KFL) misappropriated the money borrowed from a consortium 23 banks led by State Bank of India (SBI). The CVC has directed SBI and several other public sector banks to investigate the matter and submit its report. Kinetic Finance Limited, presently known as Athena Financial Services Limited, which is under liquidation, is a non-banking financial company (NBFC) into lease and hire purchase of two wheelers manufactured by Kinetic Engineering Ltd.

“In view of the serious nature of alleged fraud, a large amount involved in the fraud and the facts being verifiable to a great extent we may seek an investigation and report in the matter from the public s banks named in the complaint and also seek a status report from the RBI,” according to a CVC file noting. The noting further said that the fraud has been alleged to be perpetrated on banks by manipulating the stocks and also through issue of non-convertible debentures of Rs 55 crores against the security of two office premises actually valuing only Rs 4.5 crores.

This was following a complaint filed by a Delhi-based RTI activist, who alleged KFL of manipulating stocks and other records to cheat the consortium of banks in his complaint filed with CVC. While all the five private sector banks in the consortium filed cases against the company, none of the public sector banks did it.

In 2001, the consortium signed a working capital loan agreement with KFL, Pune, for a sum of about Rs 200 crore. Subsequently, in 2002, a stock audit report conducted by SBI indicated inflated stock position. Audit also found procedural lapses on the part of the company. According to a criminal complaint filed with district court Pune the company “has fraudulently violated the terms and conditions of all the loan agreements jointly and severally with the intention to defraud the consortium bank members.” KFL had misrepresented and fraudulently concealed the material facts from the banks right from the beginning and obtained the loans fraudulently,” it added.

And by August 2003 the company started defaulting on regular payments of debts and evading submission of monthly stock statements. In 2004, the consortium conducted a special investigation audit which showed that the company had violated the terms and conditions of the loan agreements. 

However, Kinetic management in their official response denied all allegations. " The Company did not misuse or divert any funds it borrowed. In fact, the banks conducted an independent audit through a third party auditor to examine the operations of the company and concluded that the company was following the norms laid down by RBI for NBFCs," said the response.

The company has never diverted any funds it borrowed and it had been regular in its payments to banks since its inception in early nineties, it added. In the year 2003, the banks themselves entered vehicle financing business due to which the company faced severe financial difficulties owing to sudden fall in its business and recovery of loans, said the response.

The company then tried its best to revive the business and ensure repayments by putting in place a new business model and through proposal of CDR (Corporate Debt Restructuring) led by SBI. However, one of the lenders, BOB Mutual, filed a liquidation petition and caused the Company to hand over its assets and operations to the official liquidator's office, as per directive of the Honorable High Court.  Post the liquidation, the official liquidator has been given the charge of recovery of loans and sale of assets of the Company, towards repayment of lender dues. In fact, in the liquidation of Athena Finance, Kinetic group and Promoters suffered a bigger financial loss, more than loss suffered by any of the lenders, said the response.

Even after the fraud was detected, none of the public sector banks reported the matter to appropriate authority as per the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) guidelines. Further, cases filed by the private banks against the company have been dropped, said the complainant.

Box 1:

Public sector banks in the consortium:                                     

UTI Bank

Allahabad Bank

Corporation Bank

Canara Bank

Punjab National Bank

Bank of Baroda

IDBI Bank Ltd

Bank of Maharashtra

Box 2:

According to RBI, the amount outstanding on account of Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) by 2012 is 1, 37,102 crores which is equal to 10% of India’s annual budget. Out of the total, Rs 21,604 has already been written off.

'Peace' loving Indian leaders

Gangadhar S Patil

Few politicians often seen bawling in media, have for 135 times consistently maintained their silence in the place where they are expected to speak out – Lok Sabha.

Groomed as future prime minister by the Congress, Rahul Gandhi from Amethi, UP has the dubious distinction of being counted among the 22 leaders whose presence was barely felt in the Lok Sabha as they are yet to open their mouth in the 15^th Lok Sabha.

Besides him, the list includes well-known ‘leaders’ like former Congress MP Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy, Kadapa constituency, AP,  Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) chief K Chandrasekhar, Mahabubnagar, AP and Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) chief Shibu Soren representing Dumka constituency, Jharkhand who have preferred not to participate in for 135 parliament sittings. This implies that their participation in the parliament session is zero, while the average of the current Lok Sabha is 115 comments per member.

Bhajan Lal from Haryana Haryana Janhit Congress and Tollywood actress M Vijayashanthi, Medak constituency, AP are some other interesting names, who are yet to break their silence in 15^th Lok Sabha sessions. Not only was she silent in the whole proceedings of the house, even her presence was hardly noticeable as she had the distinction of being present in only 10 per cent of the house proceedings while the tally was four per cent for K Chandrasekhar. 

These leaders were numb to the national proceedings attended by 547 representatives from 28 states and seven union territories, according to the data compiled by PRS Legislative, a Delhi based independent research organisation. MPs of respective constituencies are expected to raise the concerns of people by participating in debates, private bills and raising questions.

Opportunity to talk on the floor not only depends on the political party’s decision but also on the luck of the MP, as the question to be raised on the floor for discussion is picked by lottery system. However experts say that it’s the initiative of the MPs in taking part which finally counts. “If an MP is not interested and absents himself from the sittings, he would not be given an opportunity to talk,” said M R Madhavan, head of research section, PRS Legislative.

Moreover, these days all the major political parties give equal opportunities to its members to speak and represent their constituencies, as could be seen with left party MPs who talk on rotation basis, he added.

The current 15th Lok Sabha commenced its sessions in June 2009 and till December 2010 it held six sessions (budget, monsoon and winter).

While 15th lok Sabha witnessed silence of many MPs, there were some who never missed an opportunity of raising their voice. Like - Ananda Rao Adsul of Shiva Sena, Maharashtra – 516 times, followed by Hansraj Gangaram Ahir, BJP MP from Maharashtra - 513, and Asaduddin Owaisis of AIMM, Andhra – 473.

The study also analyzed attendance of the MPs. In the 15th Lok Sabha, till the last session, only three members have secured 100% attendance, (Ministers and Leader of opposition are exempted from the attendance), noted the study.

The figures reflect how the members take interest in presenting the problems of their respective constituency country in the Lok Sabha. 

Highest                                                                Lowest

Name and Constituency	Attendance	Name and Constituency	Attendance
P J Thomas - Congress, Kerala Idukki	100 %	Baliram Kashyap –  BJP Chattisgarh, Bastar	1 %
K P Dhanapalan - Congress, Kerala	100 %	Chandrasekhar Rao – TRS Mahabubnagar, Andhra Pradesh	4 %
Aruna Kumar Vundavalli - Congress, Andhra Pradesh - Rajahmundry	100 %	Vijaya Shanthi – TRS, Medak, Andhra Pradesh	10 %

'Peace’ loving Tamil Nadu leaders

Gangadhar S Patil

 

Tamil Nadu’s voice was also feeble in the 15^th Lok Sabha as the several MPs preferred to maintain silence despite state facing issues on several fronts like heavy rainfall, post-Sri Lankan conflict and others.

The MP whose presence was rarely felt was Thol Thirumavalan, the leader of Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi, one of the dalit parties, O. S. Manian of AIADMK representing, Danapal Venugopal of DMK and many others.

Thirumavalan spoke only for 16 times during the 135 sittings of the Lower House and his attendance was also the lowest in the state highlighting the lack of representation of people of Chidambaram. While O. S. Manian, representing Mayiladuthurai constituency, opened his mouth for 14 times, the tally for Venugopal from Tiruvannamalai was 15 times.

It is not only merely the call of the political party and speaker to allow MPs to speak on the floor, but also the interest shown by the MPs to take part in the proceedings. Ramasubbu talking to Express said that “though it is the decision of the party to allot time to its MP to speak on the floor, much depends on the initiative and interest shown by the MPs to participate in the proceedings.” Every MP gets equal opportunity to participate, he added.

There are several opportunities to represent, however members’ can use the opportunity if only they attend the proceedings regularly and show their interest in understanding issues and raising concerns of people of respective constituency, said Ramasubbu.

Contrary to the absent and silent leader, S S Ramasubbu of Congress representing Tirunelveli constituency spoke for 466 times to become the top performer from Tamil Nadu. He is followed by E.G. Sugavanam of DMK from Krisnagiri with 332 and P. Viswanathan, congress leader from Kancheepuram who spoke for 258 times.

Tamil Nadu MP’s performance:

Name	Constituency	Party	Participation	Attendance
Thirumaa Valavan Thol	Chidambaram	Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi	16	38%
O. S. Manian	Mayiladuthurai	All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam	14	56%
Danapal Venugopal	Tiruvannamalai	Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam	15	70%
P. Venugopal	Tiruvallur	All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam	16	80%
M. Krishnaswamy	Arani	Indian National Congress	32	86%
T.K.S. Elangovan	Chennai North	Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam	36	99%
Sivakumar @ J.K. Ritheesh. K	Ramanthapuram	Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam	56	40%

TN Govt suppresses info on over 3,000 farmer suicide

CHENNAI: In what has come as a shocking revelation, the Tamil Nadu government has suppressed the suicides of over 3,000 farmers in the State over the last five years.  

While National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) statistics reveal that 3,737 farmers committed suicides in Tamil Nadu over the last five years, the TN government’s agriculture department claims that only three farmers committed suicide during that period.

Also, the number of farmer suicides in 2009 given by the NCRB doesn’t match the government’s claim. Against 1,060 farmer suicides as per NCRB records, the government’s tally is zero.

State agriculture minister Veerapandi S Arumugam categorically denied NCRB’s statistics. Going a step further, the minister claimed the central agency’s figures were incorrect.

This information was obtained through a Right to Information petition from the agriculture department. The suicide figures given by the central and state agency include both personal and occupational.

“Since DMK came to power, the government has been giving loans at subsidised rates and also compensating farmers for any crop loss,” the minister said. He further said the agriculture department was monitoring farmer suicides by collecting data from the Director General of Police’s office every six months.

The NCRB’s report is compiled and collated based on data obtained from the State government police. K Nagaraj of the Madras Institute of Development Studies, who has done extensive studies on farmer suicides in the country and has studied farmer suicides between 1997 and 2005 based on NCRB data, said the figures given by NCRB were reliable and authentic, as the data was collected from the local police, who maintain records of suicides.

Farmer suicides: Damned lies and statistics

CHENNAI: While the State government and the National Crime Record Bureau (NCRB) have come out with contradictory figures on farmers’ suicide, experts in the field stand by the NCRB figures, alleging that the government was manipulating the data.

K Nagaraj of the Madras Institute of Development Studies (MIDS) said, “I have worked at the grass-root level. There is more number of suicide cases in Tamil Nadu than the number reported by the government. Government statistics is completely off the mark. It is disputable that only three farmers have committed suicide in the past five years.” The government should put a system in place to track suicide cases and provide compensation to the victims’ families accordingly, he added.

It is alarming to note that the number of farmers who committed suicide in the State had doubled, when compared to the figure of 512 in 2008. This was the highest jump recorded in the country.

A Right to Information (RTI) query further revealed that no compensation had been accorded the victims since the reason for all the three suicides had reportedly been purely personal.

It further stated that ‘farmer-friendly schemes like the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (NAIS) and free electricity to pump sets had helped in preventing suicide by farmers due to agriculture reasons.”

Madras Institute of Development Studies (MIDS) professor S Janakarajan was of the view that ‘indebtedness’ was the major reason for farmers’ suicides in the State.

“Farmers who borrow from local moneylenders at high interest rate will not be able to repay when there is a situation of crop failure,” he added.

P Sainath comments:

Dear Gangadhar.,

I have seen your story and it is factually quite correct. A lot of people react with that disbelief. That is how it was for me, too.

Your point should simply be

a) These are the figures of the National Crime Records Bureau, the only competent authority on suicide numbers of anybody, farmers, students, etc.

b) The NCRB data originate from every police station in the country so these are not your numbers or data - let the critics fight the NCRB.

Secondly, governments simply try to either ignore the NCRB data or dispute it by saying only a handful of these suicides were due to distress, the rest were for other reasons.

That is not your ground to get into and we can all endlessly debate this. The point is that they have doubled. Let the critics explain why 512 in 2008 became 1260 in 2009.

After all, the NCRB data are official. NCRB is a wing of the union home ministry.

Regards

Sainath

Who will blow the whistle

Twenty years ago when the Aruna Roy organized the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan to fight for poor peasants and rural labourers in a remote village of Rajsamand district in Rajasthan, demanding the right to know often came at a heavy price. Sadly not much has changed.

The recent death of 43-years-old RTI activist, Ramdas Bapuji Ubale-Ghadegaonkar in mysterious condition at Nanded district of Maharastra evokes horrific memories of the murders of Satyendra Dubey, an engineer of National Highway Authority of India and Manjunath Shanmugam, an Indian Oil Corporation executive, both killed for exposing criminals.

The very logic of the RTI would suggest that the time has come to legally protect “whistleblowers” or those who seek to expose wrongdoing. The Law Commission, the National Human Rights Commission and the Administrative Reforms Commission have all recommended such a law.

N. Vittal, then Chief Vigilance Commissioner, initiated the whistleblower bill in 1999. “The Public Interest Disclosure and Protection for Persons Making Disclosure Bill 2010” received assent from the cabinet last month.”

In its present form the act defines public interest disclosure as any information that shows misuse of public money or authority. Any person who provides information will be treated as Whistleblower. The bill gives powers to the CVC to protect Whistleblower from any disciplinary action for exposing corruption in government.

Besides, the CVC is required to protect the identity of the informer, in case of failure the family of the whistleblower will be able to initiate action the officials who reveal the identity. However, several activists across India are apprehensive about the bill in its present form.

According to Arvind Kejriwal, founder of Parivartan, a Delhi based Nongovernmental Organisation (NGO) Whistleblower bill 2010 is just “eyewash.” “We cannot trust CVC, as in the past it could neither check corruption nor give protection to anyone who exposed corruption.”  Kejriwal was instrumental in enactment of RTI act in India.

Asked whether his suggestion were asked while drafting the bill, he said “Not at all,” In fact he came to only about the bill after the cabinet approved it, he added. Considering the deteriorating situation and incessant attack on the activist no such bill will help to protect whistleblower, said Kejriwal. He says that the country has to have a strong criminal justice system where no murderer should be able to get away.

“Government has drafted the bill without inviting any suggestions from the people who have faced the wrath of goons for exposing corruption and in such case the bill cannot meet the expectations of people who are going to be affected,” complains M N Vijay Kumar, 1981 batch IAS officer of Karnataka Cadre. He is one of the three whistleblower of India according to Transparency International; a Germany based international NGO fighting against corruption. The other two were Satyendra Dubey and Manjunath Shanmugam.

He says the draft of Whistleblower's Bill was denied even when asked under RTI Act. According to him a large number of honest officials are under the wrong impression that whistle blowing is a serious misconduct. Without protecting whistleblowers it is almost impossible to expose high-level corruption, he added.

Krishnaraj Rao, a journalist by profession and an RTI campaigner in Mumbai feels that the bill is deadly for whistle-blowers since section 3(6) makes disclosure of complainant’s identity compulsory.

Further, Sec 4(6) says if the CVC is “of the opinion” that there are no “sufficient grounds” for proceeding with the enquiry it shall close the matter. Thus, the Act will allow CVC to methodically force whistle-blowers to expose them, and then desert them in a dangerous situation with no protection, said Rao.

“The bill will not serve any purpose, unless and until the executing authority is made independent of government,” said Neeraj kumar, he has been working in the field of RTI since 2002, when the Delhi Right to Information Act was enacted. Adding to it he said that the body should be empowered to make its own decision without the influence and interference of politicians.

RTI shows the way to act

At 27, M C Chandan has completed his masters in social work but he isn’t really looking for a job. This native of Kodagu in Karnataka, is more interested in building a non-corrupt system — which has also become a career option thanks to the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Indeed, people like Chandan all over the country are hard at work developing the right to information into a powerful tool for transparency. 

Chandan comes from a rural background, so he knows first-hand the problems of graft. He has long dreamed of a just society, and the RTI Act gave his aspirations just the boost they needed. For the last four years he has filed nearly 4,500 applications on various subjects. He seems to have found his metier, and developed a distinct vision about corruption and ways to stem it. In the process, he has turned his vocation into a career.

Chandan is one of the early RTI entrepreneurs as he has designed a four-month course on corruption for community leaders and citizens. The course promises to equip the participants with the knowledge of how to use the RTI to fight corruption.His weapon? It is called the Association for Social Transparency, Rights and Action or ASTRA (meaning weapon in Sanskrit) a non-governmental organisation based in Karnataka.

ASTRA provides training and technical assistance to government officials, and is proving to be a major money spinner. With an annual turnover of about Rs 30 lakh, he believes he is on to a good thing. “It will bring me respect and a new meaning to life.” Chandan is a founding member and one of ASTRA’s five trustees.


Besides, 10 staff, it has 45 active members across the state. “With RTI gaining popularity and people discovering its power, I believe the course will have many takers,” he says. ASTRA’s income is used for its other programmes, such as social audits, the filing of RTIs and fact-finding reports.  He makes it clear that not everyone is charged. “We conduct seminars and conferences for people (ordinary citizens) free of cost.” His work has brought Chandan instant recognition among thousands of villagers in about 13 districts, where ASTRA operates.

His interest in exposing maladministration has accelerated, and officials are suddenly discovering they are accountable. Chandan doesn’t work alone. He has involved many youths across the state, forming a network for ethical governance whose members are taught to use RTI in their respective panchayats. This is empowerment from the grassroots, and if it takes off, will become an unstoppable force for transparency.It is also an empowerment with political dividends as well. Some of these youths won in the recent panchayat election in Karnataka, Chandan says.

A couple of them are now contesting the ongoing zilla and taluk panchayat polls in the state. Even its most optimistic supporters probably wouldn’t have expected the RTI to open the door to the political arena.Take 32-year-old B Malangouda. He is one of the 10-member group which used the RTI to finger officials of Gorbal Panchayat in Raichur district for failing to implement government schemes. It’s helped his aspirations for a panchayat seat.Viswa (26), another member of the group, has formal training in RTI.

“Back in 2008, when we started with RTI, hardly anyone recognised us,” he recalls. Despite political pressure, they decided to go ahead with exposing the authorities. “Our image as likely leaders got enhanced”. Viswanath J has completed 12th standard and works on his farm. “We have filed 25 RTIs to expose corruption in central government funded SGRY and Jal Nirmal Scheme,” he says. Now, the group is all set to contest zilla and taluk panchayat elections in Karnataka. The story of P Dundappa is also instructive. His exposure of corruption in the public distribution system in his Kardiguddi village of Belgaum district made the 26-year-old a celebrity overnight,  confident enough to contest the panchayat election. He lost the last one, but hopes to win this.

The Right to Information Act is more than a new law, because it seems to have created a band of inspired youths across the country, who have become the voice of the voiceless.Krishnaraj Rao, a Mumbai-based freelance journalist, believes RTI has also given birth to what he calls non-electoral politics. It has  provided common citizens an opening into “the system”, enabling them to understand governance and administration. He believes people can now influence the actions of government without entering the electoral arena.In the era of coalition politics, he says the true meaning of “Opposition party” has been lost. Citizens using RTI are the only opposition now.

“This is what RTI has given millions of Indians, a power they never had before,” he concludes.Lawyer D Binu has another take on this phenomenon. Talking about his 15 years of experience in advocacy Binu (40), who practises in the Kerala High Court, says he has more cases than ever, which he attributes to RTI. “People are filing more cases on social issues. And the petitioners coming to me have substantial information obtained through RTI to back their cases.” On the side, he trains government officials on RTI, another source of income.  There seem to be more of these unexpected spinoffs than anyone foresaw. One is that several lawyers have taken up the cause of RTI full-time, one of them being A C Chandran of Chennai who quit the legal profession to work on RTI. So what’s the magic at work? Perhaps the fact that while all other Acts depend on administrative initiative, here it’s the citizens who do the work. Krishna Raj believes RTI has triggered a grassroots movement against corruption which is largely leaderless and therefore quite robust and difficult to disrupt.

According to V Madhav, an activist from Chennai, RTI has brought together of a variety of socially conscious individuals, from businessmen, salaried employees, doctors, lawyers, students, to retired government servants into the fight against corruption. It is rapidly becoming a social movement, an independent reform initiative if you will. “No other reform has kindled so much enthusiasm among ordinary people,” says Madhav. By making citizens responsible for enforcing transparency the Right to Information Act is being honed into a tool for social transformation.


A boost to activism:

It took eight years to expose the Telgi fake stamp paper scam, which cost the exchequer a staggering Rs 33,000 crores. Jayant Mukund Tinekar of Khanapur, north Karnataka, who started digging up the issue in 1994, succeeded only in 2003. Sharing his experience he said, “although I did not have RTI at that time, I was lucky to have some reliable and sincere government officials, who supplied the required documents to expose the scam.” With RTI it wold have been much faster. The Adarsh housing society scam was exposed in four months.JN Jayashree, a Bangalore based social activist, puts it this way. “Before the RTI Act we had to convince our elected representative to raise the issue in assembly or parliament. Today, a citizen can obtain the information without anyone’s assistance.”

A bit of tweaking:

The going might get difficult for RTI lovers as there is another attempt from the government to tame the Right to Information Act. While some believe that the time is not ripe for amending RTI, some argue the urgent need to regulate supply of information in the interest of government. The initial years of every law are seldom peaceful and orderly. It slowly takes shape as it moves, encountering various twists and turns facing judicial interpretation. l Application should relate to one subject; 2 Request should limit to 250 words; 3 Postage and other expense incurred for furnishing information would be collected from applicant.

Misusing the act: a reality check:

It’s not all roses, as many people say RTI is misused by officials to settle personal scores. C J Karira of  Hyderabad, who runs a RTI web portal, says that this is because the grievance redressal mechanism in the government is weak, biased and slow. One of the most interesting cases of misuse was reported in Maharastra, where a below-poverty-line citizen would seek information running into thousands of pages, since it is free for BPL family. It is alleged that he sold the information as waste paper for money. Some information officers complain about requests for unnecessary data, but Karira says this can be dealt with through the provision available in the Act.

A journalist discovers power of RTI ; The right way to break stories

A decade ago when a journalist wanted to dig up information on issues rocking government, the only way to access such crucial data was via sources. Despite laying hands on such documents, a doubt in reporter’s mind on the authenticity of the documents would continue to last.

While the growing competition in media industry has brought into play innovative tools of journalism for digging up information, the incessant pressure from editors to get exclusive and breaking stories continue to haunt journalists.  While some of the noted tools like spy cam, internet, high speed data card, net books and others have made their mark, unfortunately Right to Information (RTI) act, one of the indispensable tools of new- generation-journalism remains untouched.

Today, journalists are under immense pressure to get exclusive stories. Now it’s high-time that we all journalists begin exploring RTI and make effective use of it to get authentic information to expose the wrongdoing and bring back the glory of investigative journalism. All that a journalist needs to do before filing an RTI query is to follow 11 (not 10 this time) commandments given below:

1.      Know your story lead:

As a journalist, one should know his/her story lead only then the RTI h/she would be filing will get enough information to file the story. It is very important to be clear with the story idea otherwise in appropriate and unnecessary questions will fetch you incomplete and misleading information. Most of the RTI replies are incomplete and misleading and the only way to avoid it is to ask appropriate questions pertaining only to the story idea and not redundant details. You should know what exactly you want to know prove your story.

2.      File two RTI if it is a controversial subject:

It is very important for the reporter to get to the nerve of the issue/story idea he is planning to investigate. In most of the cases when the RTI query pertaining to any controversial issue is filed, the PIO tries to furnish misleading/incomplete information. In such cases the reporter should file two different RTIs in different names asking information relevant to the story deceiving PIO in getting the whole picture. The two replies, when considered together will make your story. This will not give PIO any clue on what you are planning to do with the information.

3.      Use right to inspection whenever necessary:

When a journalist –

·         Is not sure of the information needed

·         Not clear with story idea

·         The information sought belongs to some high profile personality or specific company which/who has nexus with government

·         The information sought is voluminous

Under the above mention circumstance a journalist should use the right to inspection. Under the provision of inspection, applicant would be provided with all the files requested and reporters can take the necessary information as he inspects the file.

4.      Keep the RTI small and simple – should be easy to comprehend: The RTI application should be easy to understand. Avoid using infrequent words. No problem even if the query has grammatical errors, but ensure that even a person with little knowledge of English would be able to understand your questions since most of the government officials use regional language for communication.  Try to limit the questions to 10 questions per application since answering more than 10 would be practically impossible for PIO to reply within 30 days considering the manual maintenance of records. Writing 2-3 small RTIs are better than one big RTI. Since not replying to one RTI is easy for PIO and not for many. Keep your request small and ask data for minimal period. Rather than asking information for 20-10 years ask for years which might be a landmark year or change of the government. Since voluminous request tends to get delayed for obvious reasons. Indian administration is not yet fully computerized.

5.      Never disclose your journalist identity in the RTI query: A reporter should not disclose h/her identity as a journalist since the PIO might hesitate to furnishing information fearing its publication and subsequent harassment from higher official for furnishing information. Moreover, RTI rules do not bind the applicant to disclose his profession.

6.      Know your PIO: In several offices (usually small) the head of the department by default would be the PIO. Reporter should bear this in his mind while filing RTI since the PIO in his capacity would be directly answerable to public in case of any adversity arising out of RTI reply, so he would try to avoid/delay the reply. However, in case of significant and major department especially central government department, there are dedicated PIOs appointed under RTI act who would furnish complete information requested as the disseminated information would not harm/affect them directly.

7.      Ask for the copy of the document rather than specific and tailored answers: The information with government is in the form of reports, logbooks, emails, advices, rules, regulations, manuals, gazette etc. Because the copy of these would not only give you complete and untailored information but also extra data that could be used to for the story. By asking for the copy of the relevant document you make it difficult for the PIO to loosely interpret your request. Information requested should not be in the nature of questioning government or asking any opinion, clarification or justification. The query should ask the data which is available with the government, since the PIO is can only furnish the information available and not generate it.

8.      Know all the RTI rules of respective states: Since the RTI act is central act, different states have different rules framed to govern the act in their respective state. Journalist should know the basic rules like mode of payment, format if any, word limit, number of questions allowed, fees etc. Otherwise the query may be rejected killing your precious time.

9.      File it with the right department: File the RTI with right department which posses the information requested otherwise PIO will get grace period of five days to transfer the application to concerned department besides 30 days as per the rule.  Usually it delays for more than five days.

10.  Your RTI application should not give the PIO any clue on your intention in seeking information: Write questions which would not let the PIO to get a clear picture of your idea in seeking the information.  By looking at the nature of the question requested PIO could figure out the gist of the answers, which might provoke him to delay the processing. Ask questions in different ways rather than asking directly.

11.  Rework your first RTI draft: Always revise your first RTI query in respect of questions and other components of the application. Most of the time in haste we miss to mention crucial information or commit silly mistakes, resulting in waste of 30 days as the PIO thoughtfully replies on the 30^th day, which is absolutely right as per the rule, stating that the application is incomplete.