National RTI Awards

Kerala activists oppose Kerala’s top rankings

Col NR Kurup wrote from Kerala:
I am surprised to read that one Sri Fazaluddin, Information Commissioner of Kerala is graded as No.1 and my friend Sri Palat Mohandas, SIC, Kerala also graded quite high. Sri Fazaluddin was an IC for short period from 24-5-2006 to 16-12-2008. I am not aware of any case decided by him sitting as a single Bench. He was a non-performer who was hanging to the SIC for short time. In fact I had challenged the RTI Awards Secretariat (through email) to show me a single case decided by him worth such glory. I received no response from them.
Sri Palat Mohandas, the SIC, Kerala is another non-performer. I am aware of at least 2 petitions filed by responsible citizen to HE The Governor of Kerala for removal of Sri Palat Mohandas. More than 25 Second appeals/cpmplaints of even mine are still pending with them which include many date back 3 years with him. I had even brought out in this forum that during certain months the SIC, Kerala used to dispose of an average of 1 case per month per commissioner. .

In many of my feed back reports given to the Award Committee, I had awarded Sri Palat Mohandas (- marks). Will the Award Committee be able to show a single case decided by Sri Fazaluddin or Mohandas where they have declared that the PIO has denied the information without reasonable cause and imposed penalty for the delay? One peculiarity of SIC Kerala is that they do not reckon the decisions of the CIC not even as a guide line. If any complaint is made to them about non-compliance of SIC’s order, the SIC consider it as a fresh case and has to wait for 2 to 3 years to be taken up. Non compliance of orders of SIC or non-payment of penalty or swearing false affidavit before him and getting away etc are not offences according to them. The atrocities of SIC, Kerala are far too many. In the SACK HIM FORUM Sri Palat Mohandas was included once – an SIC to be sacked.. With such awards why do we make the RTI Act a Mockery?

Major Ravindran wrote from Kerala:
Dear Col Kurup,
I share your agony. The awards for Faizuluddin and Mohandas indicate only that they are the best- a very relative term. It does not even mean they are satisfactory. So one can imagine the overall state of affairs! I do not know why Public Cause Research Foundation led by Arvind Kejriwal had taken this premature and futile activity at considerable cost and effort. How far it has damaged the cause of RTI remains to be seen. Anyhow, it takes all types to make this world and we have to live with it.
My complaint to the Governor of Kerala to sack Mohandas is attached for perusal. Also a letter sent by the KSIC (the 2nd best as per PCRF!) in gross violation of Sec 5 of the RTI Act is also scanned and attached. The third attachment is an order by Mohandas which states that an application/appeal sent through APIO will be deemed not sent as that is not prescribed (!) and money paid through the treasury will be deemed not paid as it has not been paid by DD as demanded by the PA. Both contentions are wrong- the former is once again gross failure to take cognisance of Sec 5 of the RTI Act and the latter by the rules framed by the Govt of Kerala under the RTI Act. The IC had actually misquoted the rule in para 4(ii) of his order by stating that the  PIO can require the applicant to pay the fee in any one of the modes prescribed in the rules to mean that he can prescribe one mode and make it binding! Para 4(i) of the order is self explantory.

regards n bw
ravi
Arvind Kejriwal responded to the two mails:
Dear All,
It is yet to be decided whether anyone would get an award or not or who would get the award or who would be at the top finally. It is only the relative rankings and figures of commissioners on four parameters, that have been released right now.
The jury members are very clear. If no one desrves it, they would rather not give it than give it to someone undeserving. Therefore, be assured that the award would not go to an undeserving person. Jury meets on 27th Nov.
Regarding rankings, these are relative. The fact that some such people are at the top, who you all think are so unacceptable shows where RTI stands. But the whole process was meant to initiate discussions on the basis of facts and data. Whereas we can certainly judge commissioners on the basis of some good or some bad orders, however, this exercise was meant to find out how many of ordinary people got justice.
We collected 52,000 orders from 26 Information Commissions. We found that in roughly 34,000 cases, the Commissioners had passed orders in favor of disclosures. We then wrote letters to these 34,000 people asking them – “did you finally get information after the Commission’s order?” We got response from 6000 people.

So, the whole analysis is based upon the analysis of the orders and the public feedback. Our orderwise analysis is there on our website. Please download it and let us know the mistakes. We will be more than happy to rectify the mistakes before final results are presented to jury.
It is wrong to assume that the two Kerala Commissioners have been ranked at the top or that Kerala is at top.
There are four parameters on which rankings have been done.
Pro-Disclosure Factor – Percentage of cases in which the Commissioner ordered in favor of disclosure i.e. that information has either been provided or information be provided. Kerala is 10th on this parameter with 86%. Assam is at the top with 98% orders in favor of disclosure. Palat Mohandas and P faziluddin are at 32nd and 33rd position.
Deterrent Impact: Percentage of cases in which penalties were imposed. Kerala is at a poor 16th position (out of 23, if we consider ties). Penalties were imposed in a meagre 1.4% of Pro-Disclosure cases. Mizoram is at top with penalties being imposed in 25% cases.
The above two parameters were completely based on our analysis of the orders, which is there on the website. The balance two parameters were completely based upon public feedback. Here, the Kerala and its commissioners rank quite high. Because those who have sent their feedback so far have expressed satisfaction. We just asked one question – did you finally get information after approaching Information Commission? In the case of Faziluddin, 74% of the people who have responded so far said “Yes”
But these rankings are “as on date”. They are going to change. We need everyone’s help. If we send you a list of people, in whose case orders were passed, can u please go through it and see how many of them do you personally know? Can you give us their ph nos or emails? We will call them up and take their feedback.
We need this help in each state. If anyone is willing to help us with getting more feedback, kindly let us know.
Also, it is wrong to say that Faziluddin did not pass any order singly. He passed 148 orders as a single bench. We have copies of the same.
We will present all the feedback and reactions, including the gross violations mentioned in the mails below, from the public before jury.
regards

arvind
Major Ravindran writes back:

Dear Mr Arvind Kejriwal

I am sure that you have noted the two salient points that I had mentioned- that the ‘best’ is only relative and two, that considerable effort has gone into this exercise. But I should take this opportunity to highlight another aspect. One can/should condone mistakes/errors. It can happen to anyone. But the crimes of Palat Mohandas does not come in that category. It is wilful distortion of facts and blatant subversion of the law that he has been employed to enforce. The two cases that I had listed in my earlier mail prove that point. The direction to the PIO, O/o the RDO, Palakkad is obvious. The order in AP 452/2007 needs a little deliberate reading. I am attaching herewith the rules framed by the Govt of Kerala for implementing the RTI Act. There are two documents- one the orginal and the other an amendment. The amendment has been for the worse- reducing the options for payment of cost. But even then the order of the Kerala CIC is wrong. The rule as on the date of the order-21 Dec 2007- is the one in the orginal and the amendment of 22 Dec 2007 is not applicable but still he has made false distinctions and gave a BLATANTLY WRONG order. THIS IS NOT ANY ERROR BUT A CRIME. Forget about even considering him for any award we should get him punished for his crimes. We, the RTI activists here in Kerala have been demanding that he should be tried for treason, nothing less.
regards n bw
ravi