Engineers, Who Met Online, Set Up Website To Protect Information Seekers From Attack


In an encouraging fillip for the Right To Information movement, a citizens’ initiative launched online allows applicants a shield of anonymity while seeking information from any public agency. The initiative operating under the ‘RTI Anonymous’ banner was floated on October 15 by three engineering professionals and comes at a time when transparency movements both in India and abroad are fighting for survival as information seekers are forced to work in an environment of growing hostility and resistance.

Earlier this week, citing financial reasons, whistleblower website Wikileaks announced that it would temporarily stop publishing secret government files. Closer home Prime Minister Manmohan Singh recently suggested that RTI was interfering with the working of the government. Attacks on information seekers have become commonplace, with transparency groups estimating that 28 activists have been killed since the RTI Act was passed in 2005.

For NRI Anand Sharma, web-designer from Delhi Avnish Singh, and IIT-Kharagpur student Ritesh Singh, it was the murder of RTI activist Shehla Masood which served as a wake-up call. Strangers to each other till social activist Anna Hazare’s India Against Corruption movement brought them together on common online fora, the trio decided to move beyond the agitation, pool in their expertise and lift the shadow of fear enveloping the RTI.

“The three of us were on a common social networking group and would post our opinions on what should be done next. This led to online chats and conference calls during which we realized that people who dared to stand up against corruption were being victimized,” recalls Sharma, an engineer working in the US. Given their technical know-how, setting up a website to facilitate RTIs for applicants who didn’t want to reveal their identity seemed the most logical step. The website, getup4change.org, allows anyone to log on and draft an RTI on the site or email the group using a dummy email ID. The trio and their informal network of volunteers take over from there.

“We file the RTI through random volunteers, who are based in different parts of India, thereby completely bypassing the possibility of any victimization. For instance, a volunteer in Delhi with a legitimate Delhi address files an RTI for an issue concerning Bangalore authorities,” explains Ritesh (19), adding that fellow-IITians have been volunteering to file the RTIs. Activists are more susceptible to attacks if they are within “geographical limits of the authorities they are seeking information for”. Dispersing the network of applicants, thus offers some degree of protection to information seekers.

Within two weeks of its launch, the group has drawn 35 volunteers including retired public information officers and received 105 applications on subjects varying from the spending of Parliamentarians to the illegal quota of liquor shops in Karnataka and misuse of funds in MP.

Calling the initiative a good idea, chief information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi said that the protection of whistleblowers has been a growing concern. “Such initiatives will ultimately strengthen the RTI movement. The only challenge is that information officers are unlikely to reveal sensitive information at the first go and the group would need to pursue matters diligently,” he cautioned. The challenges are evident. The website has in fact already faced a hacking attempt.

HOW IT WORKS

 
l RTI applicants can log on to www(dot)getup4change(dot)org
l Click on the ‘Submit RTI’ link to file a Right To Information application
l Users can also send an email with a dummy email ID, if they wish
l The team files the RTI through their network of volunteers at no cost to the applicants
l Applicants can choose to be appraised on the progress of their application via email
l The information or document is put up on the site once obtained
l The group has no details of applicants. So, identity of information seekers is protected

FREEDOM UNDER THREAT

Attacks on information seekers have become commonplace with transparency groups estimating that 28 activists have been killed since the RTI Act was passed in 2005
OCTOBER 2011 | Two Goan RTI activists, Derrick Dias (61) and Ganasham Kunkolkar (42) have been repeatedly attacked following their complaint against illegal motor garages
AUGUST 2011 | Environmental activist Shehla Masood (35) was shot dead in Bhopal while she was on her way to a rally in support of Anna Hazare
AUGUST 2010 | Activist Ramdas Ghadegaonkar was killed in Nanded after his RTI exposed irregularities in fuel and grain allocation under the public distribution system
MAY 2010 | Social activist Dattatreya Patil, who used the RTI to expose fake registration of handloom societies in Maharashtra, was killed in the textile town of Ichalkaranji
JANUARY 2010 | Whistleblower Satish Shetty who had exposed a series of land scams in the areas of Pimpri-Chinchwad, Talegaon and Lonavala was killed in Pune while he was taking a morning walk

The RTI is a landmark initiative in Indian democracy. It is unfortunate that activists and information seekers using this rightful transparency tool have been victimized and many have even lost their lives. It is time the government passes a legislation for the protection of whistleblowers.

The state should also be more proactive with its disclosures. Making citizens run around for information that is rightfully theirs is inexcusable. Any effort to dilute the RTI should be vehemently opposed.

Yet again, another RTI activist was brutally murdered. This time it was Ahmedabad-based Nadeem Sayeed. Will this trend soon become a run-of-the-mill crime story or is there hope? The ball is actually in the government's court - all it has to do is enforce Section 4 of RTI Act in right earnest - which mandates suo moto disclosure by all its departments

Ahmedabad-based Nadeem Sayeed is the latest Right to Information (RTI) activist to have been brutally killed in broad daylight. Last year too he was seriously assaulted but continued his campaign to expose bad governance by filing RTIs related to illegal cow slaughterhouses, bad sanitation and asking uncomfortable queries to two police officers and a Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) leader against whom charge sheet was not filed despite him being declared accused in an extortion case.

Silencing of whistleblowers with knives and guns seems to have become an untoward trend, thanks to culprits roaming free due to pathetic police investigations and government's hollow assurances on giving police protection to RTI activists and bringing in a strong Whistleblowers Protection Law. After Pune-based RTI activist Satish Shetty's murder in January 2010, the state government, prompted by a High Court directive, issued a circular assuring immediate lodging of non-cognisable first information report (FIR) by the police and speedy investigations, besides protection..

Recently, speaking at the Central Information Convention in Delhi, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said, "I would like to mention here our initiative to enact legislation for the protection of Whistleblowers which would further strengthen the Right to Information. We expect this law to be enacted in the next few months and it would, among other things, help in prevention of violence against those who seek to expose wrongdoings in our public administration.''

 However, the irony is that, the government need not look here and there for protecting activists - it is just one step away from ensuring minimum threats to RTI activists as the RTI Act itself has provisions for maximum transparency. The reference is to Section 4 of the RTI Act, which makes it mandatory for every government department to disclose most of its functions. In fact, every 'Public Authority' had to make this information accessible to public within 120 days of the enactment of the RTI Act, which was back in 2005 and regularly update the information thereafter. However, six years down the line, official secrecy is rampant if you consider that most of the 'Public Authorities' have been reticent in updating their websites in providing maximum information about its activities.

So, you may ask, how is this connected to curtailing threats and killings? The reason is simple - citizens invoke RTI to demand transparency in the small and large scale projects that the government undertakes, be in the land deals; in the concessions or grants it gives for various schemes; in the construction of civic utilities like roads, school buildings; in the funds it disburses for various purposes and so on. If all such information is readily available on the websites of the relevant government departments, there would not be any need for citizens and activists to file an RTI application and invoke ire from untoward elements.

Before that, let us see how the vicious circle of revenge and animosity can be brought to a full stop - a way that is not necessarily Utopian. The seed of threats and killings of activists, which hang like a Damocles' Sword is corruption, as commissions, kickbacks, financial irregularities and other scandalous issues surround projects meant for the public which largely funds them through the tax it pays.

If the government sternly enforces Section 4, then the first place of sin - of shady deals, bribes and financial irregularities, the bane of governance today, wherein the nexus of government officers at all levels, elected representatives and contractors that is all too well-known would be minimized. This is because both the lower and higher bureaucracy would be made accountable for their line of action as most of the information would be available in the public domain. Already, government officers are wary of the RTI Act. One of the senior police officers confessed sometime back to me that, “Earlier I used to casually put in remarks on files (called file noting which come under RTI Act) but now I am very careful as people have access to this information too.'' Hence, transparency can trigger off the need to come clean while executing projects and deals by the public authorities.

So, all that the government need to do is find ways by which strong directives to every department (which it can issue again at the backdrop of killings of RTI activists) to abide by Section 4 would be sternly enforced. This would compel government departments to put up information in the public domain made mandatory by Section 4 of the RTI Act. This would in turn make information accessible to the public at the click of the mouse. Result? More than 70% or more of RTI applications would be reduced, say experts. More importantly, threats and killings would slowly but steadily become redundant.

Under Section 4, every government department or Public Authority as it is termed in the RTI Act, is required to put up the following information, on its websites. This would reveal the extent of transparency that is mandatory on the part of the government and why uploading of such information from time to time would drastically reduce the number of RTI applications and also threats and killings of activists.

The bill is officially known as the Public Interest Disclosure and Protection to Persons Making the Disclosure Bill, 2010. The proposed Indian law intends to protect the whistleblowers, facilitate the disclosure of information and uncover corruption and deceptive practices that exist in government organizations. 

Indian Law: Key Features of the Whistleblowers Protection Bill

Some of the key features of the proposed Indian law are as follows:

• It will protect the whistleblowers from any discrimination or victimization in their workplace.
• It provides for concealing the identity of a citizen who discloses information about the misuse of power and money. Those who reveal the identity of the whistleblower will be held liable and penalized, by the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC).
• The offenders will be liable for imprisonment up to 3 years and a fine up to Rs.50, 000.
• There will be penalization in case of delays in response, under the Right to Information Act. A fine of Rs.250 will be imposed for every day of delay beyond the set deadline.
• There will be penalization for officials who try to mislead the CVC.
• The bill provides for addressing complaints against public sector employees and employees of the Central and the State Government.
• The bill also ensures the honest government officials are not harassed in anyway but those individuals who file false complaints and charges will be liable for imprisonment up to 2 years and fine up to Rs.30, 000.

Indian Law: Criticism on the Whistleblowers Protection Bill 

According to Indian law reports, the bill has faced considerable criticism because its jurisdiction is restricted to the government sector and encompasses only those who are working for the Government of India or any of its agencies. It does not cover the employees of State Governments. The draft Bill aimed at protecting whistleblowers is a welcomed move. Given the fact that this bill, if it becomes law, is a very important legislation, the lack of public debate and consultation on the Bill seems to indicate the danger of it becoming another ‘paper tiger.’ 

Typically, the Ministries that propose draft legislations involve an elaborate process of public consultation to give the public a fair opportunity to criticize and scrutinize the provisions carefully. In this case, such an opportunity has been denied to the public and there is considerable criticism about it.

No doubt, the proposed law to protect whistleblowers will assist to detect corruption, ensure better information flow and pave the way for successful prosecution of corrupt individuals through clear and protected processes. However, the public in India have poor levels of confidence in fighting corruption because they fear retaliation and intimidation against those who dare to make complaints. Another worry pertains to the delay in disposing off these cases. Without public debate on the provisions of this proposed law, it is clear that there is no way for people to measure its effectiveness when the draft bill comes into force as law.

A whistleblower is a person who raises concern about frauds, corruptions, wrongdoings and mismanagement. For instance, a government employee who exposes corruption practices, within his department is a whistleblower. So is an employee of a private organization, who raises his voice against misconduct, within the company. 

The misconduct can be classified in several ways, such as:

• Violation of Indian laws.
• Posing direct threat to public interest.
• Violation of health or safety norms.
• Deceptive practices.

 A whistleblower may approach an external agency, such as law enforcement officers, media or social groups. He may also report the matter to other members of the organization.

 

A whistleblower is defined as someone who exposes wrongdoing, fraud, corruption or mismanagement. In many cases, this could be a person who works for the government who would report misconduct within the government or it could be an employee of a private company who reports corrupt practices within the company. 

The law that a government enacts to protect such persons who help expose corruption is called a whistleblower protection law. 

The issue of protection for whistleblowers caught the attention of the entire nation when National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) engineer Satyendra Dubey was killed after he wrote a letter to the office of then PM A B Vajpayee detailing corruption in the construction of highways.