Kathmandu Post

Editorial»

Right to information

JAN 29 -
The sudden revelation that the government has revised the Right to Information Act (RTI) of 2007, with a view towards withholding many more types of information than before, is puzzling. So far, the Chief Secretary has been given chief responsibility for the revision, as a committee headed by him undertook it. But such a major policy decision cannot only have come from a government bureaucrat, no matter how senior. It is clear that political parties, particularly those that are currently in government, were behind this decision. Judging by the nature of the decision, which was carefully thought out, this policy was likely on the anvil for a substantial period of time. It is perhaps not wrong to think, then, that this was a policy pushed by the political parties in some secrecy, as they were aware that it would provoke a backlash. And the details regarding the RTI were thus revealed only after it was certain that it would come under implementation.

A glance at the list of the issues on which secrecy is to be maintained and public dissemination of information is to be prohibited reveals that the major intention behind the revision to the RTI is to limit influence by various non-political actors, including the media and civil society groups. Issues under discussion in the cabinet is to remain secret, for example. As are ambassadorial nominations or matters that are under investigation by the police or the Commission for the Investigation of the Abuse of Authority (CIAA). Political leaders will likely argue that such decisions are necessary to ensure more stable governance and the effective functioning of the cabinet. They will argue that such measures are necessary if decision making in the country is to be swift and efficient and to actually be to the benefit of the people.

But there are many other ramifications of the revision to the RTI act that will be entirely negative. For one, it cannot be expected in Nepal’s context for political leaders to take enlightened decisions that will benefit the broader populace. It is likely that the prohibitions on information will be misused by politicians to cover up their blatant misuse of public resources and the self-serving nature of many of their decisions. In this period of transition, withholding information from the public can be dangerous. At a time when many national issues are also matters of public interest, withholding information may also call for more mass frustration with the government. It will also make civil society weaker, which in the absence of adequate information; will not be as easily able to mobilize against the excesses of the political class. In other words, the revisions to the RTI Act are fundamentally counter to democracy and the aspirations of the 2006 Jana Andolan. In the interest of the broader public, it is essential that the government revoke these measures. If revisions to the RTI are deemed necessary, they have to be undertaken in broad consultation with civil society groups and in full view of the media. 

Posted on: 2012-01-30 08:52

---