Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]Code Contextif (Configure::read('debug')) {
trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);
} else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f41365698a8-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f41365698a8-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f41365698a8-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 17222, 'title' => 'A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -Forbes India </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> &ldquo;The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can&rsquo;t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,&rdquo; says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Order</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a &lsquo;judicial&rsquo; member. By &lsquo;judicial&rsquo;, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Disorder</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. &ldquo;Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,&rdquo; says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. &ldquo;If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,&rdquo; says Agarwal. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. &ldquo;While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,&rdquo; says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People&rsquo;s Right to Information. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'Forbes India, 3 October, 2012, http://forbesindia.com/article/special/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti/33837/1', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17350, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 17222, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra', 'metaKeywords' => 'Right to Information,rti', 'metaDesc' => ' -Forbes India Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify">-Forbes India</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&ldquo;The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can&rsquo;t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,&rdquo; says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Order</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a &lsquo;judicial&rsquo; member. By &lsquo;judicial&rsquo;, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Disorder</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. &ldquo;Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,&rdquo; says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. &ldquo;If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,&rdquo; says Agarwal.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. &ldquo;While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,&rdquo; says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People&rsquo;s Right to Information.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 17222, 'title' => 'A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -Forbes India </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> &ldquo;The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can&rsquo;t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,&rdquo; says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Order</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a &lsquo;judicial&rsquo; member. By &lsquo;judicial&rsquo;, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Disorder</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. &ldquo;Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,&rdquo; says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. &ldquo;If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,&rdquo; says Agarwal. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. &ldquo;While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,&rdquo; says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People&rsquo;s Right to Information. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'Forbes India, 3 October, 2012, http://forbesindia.com/article/special/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti/33837/1', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17350, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 17222 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra' $metaKeywords = 'Right to Information,rti' $metaDesc = ' -Forbes India Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify">-Forbes India</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&ldquo;The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can&rsquo;t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,&rdquo; says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Order</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a &lsquo;judicial&rsquo; member. By &lsquo;judicial&rsquo;, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Disorder</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. &ldquo;Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,&rdquo; says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. &ldquo;If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,&rdquo; says Agarwal.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. &ldquo;While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,&rdquo; says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People&rsquo;s Right to Information.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -Forbes India Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div style="text-align: justify">-Forbes India</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">“The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can’t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,” says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Order</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a ‘judicial’ member. By ‘judicial’, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Disorder</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. “Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,” says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. “If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,” says Agarwal.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. “While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,” says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People’s Right to Information.</div> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $maxBufferLength = (int) 8192 $file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php' $line = (int) 853 $message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]Code Context$response->getStatusCode(),
($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')
));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f41365698a8-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f41365698a8-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f41365698a8-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 17222, 'title' => 'A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -Forbes India </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> &ldquo;The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can&rsquo;t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,&rdquo; says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Order</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a &lsquo;judicial&rsquo; member. By &lsquo;judicial&rsquo;, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Disorder</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. &ldquo;Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,&rdquo; says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. &ldquo;If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,&rdquo; says Agarwal. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. &ldquo;While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,&rdquo; says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People&rsquo;s Right to Information. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'Forbes India, 3 October, 2012, http://forbesindia.com/article/special/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti/33837/1', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17350, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 17222, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra', 'metaKeywords' => 'Right to Information,rti', 'metaDesc' => ' -Forbes India Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify">-Forbes India</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&ldquo;The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can&rsquo;t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,&rdquo; says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Order</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a &lsquo;judicial&rsquo; member. By &lsquo;judicial&rsquo;, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Disorder</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. &ldquo;Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,&rdquo; says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. &ldquo;If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,&rdquo; says Agarwal.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. &ldquo;While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,&rdquo; says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People&rsquo;s Right to Information.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 17222, 'title' => 'A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -Forbes India </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> &ldquo;The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can&rsquo;t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,&rdquo; says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Order</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a &lsquo;judicial&rsquo; member. By &lsquo;judicial&rsquo;, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Disorder</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. &ldquo;Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,&rdquo; says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. &ldquo;If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,&rdquo; says Agarwal. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. &ldquo;While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,&rdquo; says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People&rsquo;s Right to Information. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'Forbes India, 3 October, 2012, http://forbesindia.com/article/special/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti/33837/1', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17350, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 17222 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra' $metaKeywords = 'Right to Information,rti' $metaDesc = ' -Forbes India Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify">-Forbes India</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&ldquo;The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can&rsquo;t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,&rdquo; says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Order</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a &lsquo;judicial&rsquo; member. By &lsquo;judicial&rsquo;, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Disorder</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. &ldquo;Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,&rdquo; says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. &ldquo;If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,&rdquo; says Agarwal.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. &ldquo;While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,&rdquo; says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People&rsquo;s Right to Information.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -Forbes India Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div style="text-align: justify">-Forbes India</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">“The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can’t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,” says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Order</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a ‘judicial’ member. By ‘judicial’, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Disorder</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. “Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,” says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. “If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,” says Agarwal.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. “While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,” says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People’s Right to Information.</div> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $reasonPhrase = 'OK'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]Code Context$value
), $first);
$first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f41365698a8-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f41365698a8-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f41365698a8-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f41365698a8-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 17222, 'title' => 'A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -Forbes India </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> &ldquo;The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can&rsquo;t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,&rdquo; says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Order</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a &lsquo;judicial&rsquo; member. By &lsquo;judicial&rsquo;, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Disorder</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. &ldquo;Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,&rdquo; says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. &ldquo;If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,&rdquo; says Agarwal. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. &ldquo;While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,&rdquo; says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People&rsquo;s Right to Information. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'Forbes India, 3 October, 2012, http://forbesindia.com/article/special/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti/33837/1', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17350, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 17222, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra', 'metaKeywords' => 'Right to Information,rti', 'metaDesc' => ' -Forbes India Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify">-Forbes India</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&ldquo;The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can&rsquo;t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,&rdquo; says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Order</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a &lsquo;judicial&rsquo; member. By &lsquo;judicial&rsquo;, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Disorder</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. &ldquo;Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,&rdquo; says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. &ldquo;If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,&rdquo; says Agarwal.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. &ldquo;While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,&rdquo; says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People&rsquo;s Right to Information.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 17222, 'title' => 'A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -Forbes India </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> &ldquo;The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can&rsquo;t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,&rdquo; says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Order</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a &lsquo;judicial&rsquo; member. By &lsquo;judicial&rsquo;, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Disorder</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. &ldquo;Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,&rdquo; says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. &ldquo;If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,&rdquo; says Agarwal. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. &ldquo;While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,&rdquo; says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People&rsquo;s Right to Information. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'Forbes India, 3 October, 2012, http://forbesindia.com/article/special/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti/33837/1', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17350, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 17222 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra' $metaKeywords = 'Right to Information,rti' $metaDesc = ' -Forbes India Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify">-Forbes India</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens&rsquo; Right to Information</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">&ldquo;The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can&rsquo;t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,&rdquo; says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Order</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a &lsquo;judicial&rsquo; member. By &lsquo;judicial&rsquo;, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Disorder</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. &ldquo;Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,&rdquo; says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. &ldquo;If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,&rdquo; says Agarwal.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. &ldquo;While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,&rdquo; says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People&rsquo;s Right to Information.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -Forbes India Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div style="text-align: justify">-Forbes India</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">“The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can’t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,” says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Order</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a ‘judicial’ member. By ‘judicial’, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Disorder</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. “Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,” says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. “If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,” says Agarwal.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. “While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,” says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People’s Right to Information.</div> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $cookies = [] $values = [ (int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8' ] $name = 'Content-Type' $first = true $value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
<head>
<link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 17222, 'title' => 'A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -Forbes India </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> “The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can’t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,” says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Order</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a ‘judicial’ member. By ‘judicial’, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Disorder</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. “Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,” says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. “If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,” says Agarwal. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. “While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,” says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People’s Right to Information. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'Forbes India, 3 October, 2012, http://forbesindia.com/article/special/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti/33837/1', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17350, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 17222, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra', 'metaKeywords' => 'Right to Information,rti', 'metaDesc' => ' -Forbes India Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify">-Forbes India</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">“The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can’t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,” says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Order</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a ‘judicial’ member. By ‘judicial’, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Disorder</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. “Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,” says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. “If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,” says Agarwal.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. “While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,” says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People’s Right to Information.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 17222, 'title' => 'A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -Forbes India </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> “The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can’t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,” says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Order</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a ‘judicial’ member. By ‘judicial’, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>The Disorder</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. “Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,” says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. “If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,” says Agarwal. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. “While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,” says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People’s Right to Information. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'Forbes India, 3 October, 2012, http://forbesindia.com/article/special/a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti/33837/1', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'a-recent-supreme-court-ruling-could-kill-rti-by-udit-misra-17350', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17350, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 17222 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra' $metaKeywords = 'Right to Information,rti' $metaDesc = ' -Forbes India Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify">-Forbes India</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">“The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can’t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,” says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Order</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a ‘judicial’ member. By ‘judicial’, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>The Disorder</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. “Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,” says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. “If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,” says Agarwal.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. “While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,” says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People’s Right to Information.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'
include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
![]() |
A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Could Kill RTI by Udit Misra |
-Forbes India Why the recent Supreme Court ruling threatens to kill citizens’ Right to Information The Supreme Court has placed the Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex body to deal with appeals regarding RTI, as well as the Information Commissions across the states in a fine pickle. On September 13, a division bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice AK Patnaik and Justice Swatanter Kumar, passed an order which would fundamentally change the constitution and working of Information Commissions. Apart from the operational problems, the suggested changes would require an amendment to the RTI Act by the government. As a result, none of the information commissioners know whether to discharge their duty and, if so, how. Moreover, many RTI activists are complaining about a blatant case of judicial over-reach. “The SC can say something is wrong and needs to be changed but they can’t order the legislature to make a law according to their directions,” says Subhash Agarwal, a prominent RTI activist in New Delhi. The Order The SC has ordered that Information Commissions should henceforth hear appeals as two-member benches, replacing the existing norm of each member working separately. What further complicates the matter is the ruling that one member in each bench should necessarily be a ‘judicial’ member. By ‘judicial’, the SC implies someone who has practised law for 20 years or preferably a judge or a retired judge of the SC or a high court. Lastly, the Chief Information Commissioner at the Centre and the states should also be a judicial member. The Disorder The Central Information Commission has eight active members, including the chief, out of the total 11 vacancies. Not one among them is a judicial member. Nobody, including the commissioners, is clear how they should function, considering there are no judicial members to constitute even a single bench. Even when judicial members join, the bunching of two members in a team is likely to slow down the disposal rate because there will only be half the outlets dealing with complaints, not to mention the increased time taken when two members deliberate. “Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50 percent of the current disposals,” says Shailesh Gandhi, a former Information Commissioner at the CIC. The probable rise in pendency to almost five years could sound the death knell for the Act, according to Gandhi. Certain other elements in the order have confused observers. For instance, it is unlikely that a sitting judge will ever leave the Supreme Court to join the CIC. Yet ironically, a retired judge of the SC would also not be able to join since both the SC and CIC have the same retirement age of 65 years. It is not clear why the head of Information Commissions must necessarily be a judicial member. “If anything, he or she needs to have some administrative acumen over and above a regular member,” says Agarwal. Still, not every thing is wrong with the SC order. One view is that the inclusion of judicial members is likely to bring some diversity in the appointees to these commissions, often described as a parking lot for bureaucrats. “While the decisions will be more robust, one is still afraid that the real loser might be the common man who may find it too daunting to represent himself in front of a judge and may incur additional costs in hiring lawyers,” says Anjali Bhardwaj, member of the National Campaign for People’s Right to Information.
|