The Central Information Commission wants to determine whether elected representatives are legally bound to respond to questions under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. A decision on the matter could have far-reaching ramifications for MPs, MLAs and MLCs, who have hitherto avoided responding to RTI queries

The Central Information Commission, hearing a case filed by RTI applicants, has sought legal opinion on whether Members of Parliament (MPs), assemblies and legislative councils can be declared ‘public authorities’ and made to respond to questions from citizens under the Right to Information Act.

The commission, for its part, has recognised that a Member of Parliament is given specific authority by the Constitution in return for which he receives public funds. But there are growing complaints that MPs and Members of Legislative Assemblies and Councils (MLAs and MLCs) have not been responding to RTI queries regarding their work as public representatives.

RTI applicants approached the commission over the issue arguing that unless elected representatives were declared ‘public authorities’ under the Act, they could not be held responsible for dispensation of information. In response, the commission had sought public opinion and now wants a legal opinion as well.

Hearings on the matter began on September 15, 2008, in New Delhi before Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah with lawyer Prashant Bhushan presenting arguments on behalf of the RTI applicants. “We heard the first set of arguments but there was no one from the respondent’s side to answer. Our registrar kept the point of the respondent. We are seeking legal opinion on the matter and will soon announce dates for further hearings,” Habibullah said.

One of the RTI applications is from Uttar Pradesh resident Awadesh Mishra, who sought information from Amethi MP Rahul Gandhi related to recommendations made by the latter on assistance to NGOs. When Mishra did not receive a reply, he approached the Lok Sabha secretariat that held that the MP was not a public authority as defined under the RTI Act. The secretariat said it did not have the information and that it could only be made available by the MP.

Similar requests for information were filed by Lucknow residents Girish Chandra Mishra and Radhey Shyam with Rae Bareli MP and UPA Chairperson Sonia Gandhi. Delhi resident Sartaj Ahmed has sought information from his area MLA Saheb Singh Chauhan regarding development work in his constituency. The Nawanshahr-based Human Empowerment League of Punjab (HELP) has sought the list of questions posed by MLAs representing the district inside the Punjab Vidhan Sabha. The RTI applicants also wanted to know from the state secretariat how much time the MLAs had spent in the Vidhan Sabha.

Incidentally, the commission intervened a couple of months ago making political parties disclose to the public the income tax they paid. The commission ruled that the public had a right to know the taxes paid by political parties as they were not private citizens.

The commission had earlier declared stock exchanges, power distribution companies and the Indian Olympic Association public authorities, as they were owned, controlled or substantially financed by the government. This has been challenged in court.

Source: PTI, September 17, 2008
            The Hindu, September 15, 2008
            www.rtiindia.org, September 2008