1. In a verdict of farreaching consequence, the Delhi High Court justice S Ravindra Bhat has considerably expanded the scope of the Right to Information (RTI) Act by asking the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), the Commonwealth Games Organising Commitee (OC) and the upmarket Sanskriti School to disseminate information and depute a public information officer (PIO).
2. Justice Bhat chiefly relied upon the fact that all the three non-government and autonomous organisations received substantial financing from the central government, that is public funds. The RTI Act recognizes that non-state actors may have responsibilities of disclosing information which would be useful and necessary for the people they serve as it furthers the process of empowerment, assures transparency and makes democracy responsive and meaningful.
3. He also dismissed the argument that absence of government control over an organisation allows it relief from accountability, holding it to be irrelevant to decide whether they are a public authority or not. The court conceded that the school and the two sports federations were autonomous and free from government control , but pointed out that for smooth functioning, these bodies were either seeking huge amounts from the government or concessions in one form or the other. For example, in IOAs case the high court agreed it noticed no state or public involvement in its day-to-day functioning but noted how IOA is the national face of the Olympic movement in India ... its word determines the fate of the sport and sportsmen and its approval is essential for any sport in India to be part of the movement.
4. Relying on balance sheets provided to it by the central government, the HC also reminded the association how it was funded by the government whenever its athletes and delegates travelled in the country and abroad. Similarly, the OCs contention that it was a temporary body in existence for the limited purpose of organising the 2010 Games, failed to move the court. Instead, the judge said the central government had committed a sum of Rs 767 crore to it (out of which nearly 350 crore was paid) due to which a citizen had the right to know how its being utilized.
5. As regards Sanskriti School, the HC agreed with the reasoning of the Central Information Commission (CIC) that on account of it receiving grants to the tune of Rs 24 crore from various central ministeries, concessional land in prime areas of Delhi it ought to be treated as a public authority under the RTI Act. All the three organisations had separately challenged the ruling of the CIC declaring them to be under the ambit of the RTI Act.
6. The move is expected to open the floodgates of pointed RTI queries directed against these three bodies, seeking information about their management, grants and administration. The judgment will have an impact in injecting an element of accountability not just in the IOA and the OC, but in all the sports federations.
No comments:
Post a Comment