Skip to main content

The Calamitous Amendment

22nd July 2019. "All those in favour? All those against?" screeched Om Birla on a microphone in the Lok Sabha. It was the Right to Information Amendment Bill of 2019.  The opposition had violently refuted the amendment bill for three days. The vote would decide the fate of Indian democracy. 

On 12th October 2005 came into existence a new act enforcing our fundamental rights, The Right to Information.  Aruna Roy, the mastermind of the RTI rejoiced with her association, The Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan. The RTI was blazoned one of the planet's most exquisite democratic laws, appending India to an exotic list of transparent democratic nations. India's multitude now had access to the government's repositories and operations without the lingering road to justice via the Indian judicial system. A reply from government officials in a stipulated time duration of 30 days! For the commonality or the activists: RTI was boon.

The RTI Act of 2005 imposed rigorous regulations upon the government. It called for the conception of a sovereign government body not unlike the Election Commission of India with a comprehensive array of powers to fortify the RTI: The Central Information Commission (CIC).  The CIC operated as a supervisory body; acting upon complaint of contravention of the RTI or non-compliance of Public Information Officers. The President of India appointed the Chief Information Commissioner and his ten associates after considering the recommendations of a select committee of Parliamentary officials. The council would constitute of the Leader of Opposition, the Prime Minister and other senior members of parliament.  The RTI supplied the common citizenry with ammunition to combat the felonious and anomalistic functioning of the government. The RTI necessitated the concerning body to relinquish documents questioned for by the people. The concerning body could be any organisation with 95 per-cent governmental funding. The body could range from political parties to select NGOs.


Since its formulation in 2005, the RTI has been a bone of contention for governmental authorities. The first amendment to hinder the RTI arrived in August 2013. The RTI had previously demarcated political parties inside its purview. However, this amendment rid the RTI of its requisite power. The commonality was not defenceless yet. The government could be targeted still. RTI activists charged ahead like cavaliers of justice and righteousness.  The CIC was nevertheless autonomous with no review of its circular pay structure (excepting the Chief Information Commissioner). It was not subjugated or suppressed by the government.


On 24th October 2019, a democratic calamity shook India. The RTI was annihilated by the most recent amendment of the RTI. The CIC and lower public information officers' salaries would rest in the hands of the government with discretionary powers to decide their tenures and salaries. The CIC would be paid hierarchically.  Such an amendment would thoroughly influence the steadfast and honest workings of the RTI. The Information Officers would be apprehensive of the government reducing their salaries and retirement benefits. The RTI Amendment of 2019 would remove the venom of the RTI and provide corrupted answers to the quintessential queries of the commonality and activists.


Citizens, GlobeIsOne feels strongly for the democracy of India. Its subjugation will result in the downfall of the Republic to authoritarian powers vested with totalitarianism. We must not bow down to the puppet of the RTI which stands before us. The resurrection of the RTI to its position of power is vital for a progressive democracy such as India. GlobeIsOne strongly condemns this move as undemocratic and against the spirit of democracy. The idea of India is at risk of being lost. Recover the idea and uncover the democratic sentiment which led to our independence. As was rightly stated, 'Free speech is the hardest to get, but the easiest to lose.'

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

DECODED - Divisive Statements (P1)

Divisive statements. They are ubiquitous and not specific to any particular field. However, their most explicit usage is majorly in the field of politics. Nation-wide or region-specific, these statements are cunningly crafted to shock, provoke and divide. The Britons were pioneers in the strategy of 'divide-and-rule'. These tactics are conventional methods of providing a 'stable' base to configure an electoral gain for any candidate or political party. Its extensive usage threatens the pillars of democracy and the foundations of the Constitution. To immunise the populace to reject knowledgeably the statements made for the sake of electoral glory and not for the true spirit which it withholds. Readers here is an accurate and fact-filled description and analysis of the problem we are faced by today. Political parties are, in the author's definition,  an organised group of politically motivated individuals progressing an ideology forced upon them by Adam Smith...

India's Real Problem

Recently, the BBMP (A municipal body existing in Bengaluru) announced another scheme for the metropolitan city's security. As many laws, regional and nation-wide, go through about citizen security; this one was centric upon Women. The BBMP generously provided 33.64 crores of Indian Rupees to this project (Bengaluru only). The scheme engages the making of chambers for Women at Bus stands. The fogged glass enveloping the separate seats will ensure their security, shielding them from the looks of others. Such laws and schemes are commonplace in India. To the average eye, this may seem like a benevolent move by the authorities. Looks are deceiving; in this case, more so. These laws have inconceivable depths. Many consequences uncover upon a thorough investigation of the proposed scheme. Unfortunately, their existence substantially hinders the intention of the programme.  The BBMP must protect women from harassment (Cutthroat political competition). If the BBMP aims to get re-...

Save Dissent NOW!

A patriot is one whose heart beats true to the country. While our archetypal vision of a patriot happens to be of pre-independence liberators and smartly dressed khaki suited army men, they happen to be a minority in the patriotic community. Howard Zinn, historian and playwright, once said: "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." His words imply the significance of dissent in any nation. Agreeably, dissent plays a remarkably fundamental role as the guiding star of a nation's democratic polity.  The real heroes of any nation's success lie shadowed and filmed over by overhanging politicians aiming to desist dissent amongst the voters. While we continually see incumbent governments whipping out advertisement campaigns and fiery speeches for patriotism and army service, almost rarely does any incumbent parliamentarian wish for active citizen participation.  Dissenters in India who reject the incredulous proposal of the Citizenship Amendment Act of 2019, have tak...