The Supreme Court has rushed to the Delhi High Court seeking a stay on the Central Information Commission's May 11 order allowing litigants to raise RTI queries on the logic behind judgments. How could the Supreme Court provide information under RTI on why a particular order or judgment was passed that went beyond the reasoning and logic given in that order or judgment, the SC asked. The CIC's bare-all order...

The draft Communal Violence Bill, prepared by a Working Group (WG) of the Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council (NAC), goes beyond existing legislation in four significant ways: it recognises identity-based or targeted crimes and organised mass violence as special offences, while placing accountability of public officials at the heart of the law, with varying penalties for dereliction of duty. Finally, it provides for the creation of a National Authority and...

-The Hindu   The National Campaign for People's Right to Information has expressed its concern at the reported official move to exclude agencies such as the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the National Investigation Agency (NIA), and the National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID) from the Right to Information Act. In a statement signed by Aruna Roy, Nikhil Dey, Prashant Bhushan, Venkatesh Nayak and Anjali Bharadwaj, among others, the NCPRI described the proposed exclusion...

CBI told to submit first report within six months Many States erred in implementing the schemes The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe alleged misuse of the schemes under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) in 100 villages in six districts of Orissa. A three-judge Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia, Justices K.S. Radhakrishnan and Swatanter Kumar gave this direction on a petition...

‘More information is always better than no information' Amnesty International on Thursday condemned attempts by American authorities to prosecute WikilLeaks founder Julian Assange describing it as a bid to “stifle” free speech in the name of national security. “National security should not be used to stifle freedom of speech except in very restricted circumstances where there is clear evidence that there is a genuine threat to national security. We are committed...