ડાંગના અધિકારીઓ દ્વારા RTI નિયમનો થતો ખુલ્લેઆમ ભંગ. અરજદારે ઉચ્ચ કક્ષાએ ફરિયાદ કરતા માહોલ ગરમાયો

ભાસ્કર ન્યૂઝ: સાપુતારા: Saturday, 20 April 2024.
સાપુતારા ડાંગ સેવા મંડળ, આહવા સંચાલિત (ગ્રાન્ટ ઇન એઈડ) છાત્રાલયોમાં ગૃહપતિ, ગૃહમાતા, મદદનીશ રસોઈયા અને ચોકીદારની ભરતીની જાહેરાત ન્યૂઝ પેપરમાં તા. 8મી ઓગસ્ટ 2023ના રોજ આપવામાં આવી હતી. આ ભરતીમાં ગેરરીતિ થયા હોવાની શંકા અરજદારને થતા અરજદારે સંપૂર્ણ ભરતી પ્રક્રિયા પૂર્ણ થતા તા. 18/12/2023 ના રોજ સંપૂર્ણ ભરતી પ્રક્રિયાને આવરી લે તેવા મુદ્દા નં 1થી 6 સુધીની માહિતી મળે તેવી માહિતી અધિકાર અધિનિયમ 2005 હેઠળ અરજી કરી હતી. ઉલ્લેખનીય છે કે, અરજદારે ડાંગ સેવા મંડળ આહવાએ કરેલી ભરતીની સંપૂર્ણ ભરતી પ્રક્રિયાની માહિતી અધિકાર અધિનિયમ2005ના કાયદા હેઠળ માંગવામાં આવી હતી પરંતુ 30 દિવસ પૂર્ણ થયા હોવા છતાં પણ મદદનીશ સમાજ કલ્યાણ અધિકારી, આહવા દ્વારા માહિતી આપવામાં આવી ન હતી. શું અધિકારીઓ સરકારના કાયદાથી પણ મોટા થઈ ગયા છે તેવા સવાલો અરજદાર સાથે ડાંગ જિલ્લાના નાગરિકોમાં ઉદભવી રહ્યા છે? અરજદારને માહિતી ન મળતા તેમણે તા.12/02/2024ના રોજ પ્રથમ અપીલ સમાજ કલ્યાણ અધિકારી ડાંગને કરી હતી ત્યારે પ્રથમ અપીલ સુનાવણીમાં અરજદારને અધૂરી અને ગેરમાર્ગે દોરે તેવી ભ્રામક માહિતી આપવામાં આવી હતી. અરજદારને સંતોષકારક માહિતી સાથે સંબંધિત અધિકારીઓના સંતોષકારક જવાબ ન મળતાં અધૂરી માહિતી અધિકારીઓ દ્વારા આપતા અરજદારે ગુજરાત માહિતી આયોગ, ગાંધીનગરમાં ફરિયાદ કરતા ડાંગ જિલ્લામાં ચર્ચાનો વિષય બન્યો છે. તમામ અધિકારીઓમાં અરજદારે ઉચ્ચ કક્ષાએ ફરિયાદ નોંધાવતા અધિકારીઓમાં ફફડાટ ફેલાયો છે. અત્રે ઉલ્લેખનીય છેકે, ડાંગ જિલ્લામાં ચાલતી ગોબાચારી અને ભ્રષ્ટાચારને ઉજાગર કરવા માટે આરટીઆઇ એક્ટિવિસ્ટ દ્વારા અવારનવાર વિગતો માંગવામાં આવી રહી છે છતાં કાર્યવાહી થઇ નથી.

Journalists urged to use RTI law to counter fake news

News Inter.: Peshawar: Saturday, 20 April 2024.

Participants pose for a group photo during an event on
February 26, 2024.

The speakers at a two-day training workshop on Friday stressed the need to utilize the right-to-information law to counter fake news and carry out investigative reporting.
The Centre for Peace and Development Initiatives (CPDI) and Individual Land (IL) organised the training titled “RTI for Investigative Reporting, Countering Fake News & Gender Inclusive Reporting.”
Aziz Ahmad, Provincial Coordinator of the project, “Citizens for Good Governance” imparted the training. Trainer and journalist Saiful Islam Saifi, Pir Wilayat Shah and Noor Alam highlighted the need to use effectively the RTI Law.
They added that the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Right to Information Act 2013 was promulgated in pursuant to Article 19-A of the Constitution. The trainers said that according to the Act, every citizen shall have the right to have access to information in all matters of public importance, subject to regulation and reasonable restrictions imposed by law.
They added that the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Right to Information Act 2013 was enacted to improve governance, reduce corruption and hold accountable the government, autonomous and statutory organizations. The resource persons said the Act gave all the citizens the right to have access to information to participate meaningfully in a democratic setup.
Shedding light on investigative reporting, the speakers said that the journalists should play their part in encountering fake news. They demanded the government to make strict legislation to counter the fake news as it was a threat to the country’s solidarity.

ચૂંટણી બોન્ડ છાપવાનો, કમિશનનો, સરકારી મશીન સહિતનો ખર્ચ કોના માથે નખાયો? RTIમાં થયો ખુલાસો

Gujarat Samachar: Ahmedabad: Friday, 19 April 2024.

કેન્દ્ર સરકારે ઈલેક્ટોરલ બોન્ડ સ્કીમના સંચાલન પર કરદાતાઓના 14 કરોડ રૂપિયા ખર્ચ્યા હોવાનો માહિતી અધિકાર (RTI)માં ખુલાસો થયો છે. આરટીઆઈ કાર્યકર્તા કમોડોર (સેવાનિવૃત્ત) લોકેશ બત્રાએ કરેલી અરજીના જવાબમાં બહાર આવેલા ડેટા મુજબ, ચૂંટણી બોન્ડના પ્રિન્ટિંગ અને મેનેજમેન્ટ પર કરદાતાઓના નાણાં ચૂકવવામાં આવ્યા છે અને આ માટે કેન્દ્ર સરકારે લગભગ 14 કરોડ રૂપિયાનો ખર્ચ કર્યો છે.
ચૂંટણી બોન્ડના વેચાણ પર કમિશન પેટે 12 કરોડથી વધુનો ખર્ચ
રિપોર્ટ અનુસાર કુલ 30 તબક્કામાં ચૂંટણી બોન્ડના વેચાણ પર કમિશન તરીકે 12,04,59,043 રૂપિયા ખર્ચ કરાયો, જ્યારે બોન્ડની પ્રિન્ટિંગનો ખર્ચ (Printing Costs) 1,93,73,604 રૂપિયા હતો. કમિશનનો અર્થ ભારતીય સ્ટેટ બેંક (SBI) દ્વારા ચૂંટણી બોન્ડની વેચાણ કામગીરી અને સંચાલનની કામગીરી પર લેવાતી ફીના સંદર્ભમાં અપાયો છે. આર્થિક બાબતોના વિભાગના RTI જવાબમાં જણાવાયું છે કે, ‘માસ્ક-ઈ-પ્રિન્ટ સલામતી ચકાસવા માટેના સાધનો’ પર વધારાના 6720 રૂપિયા ખર્ચાયા છે.
કેટલી રકમના કેટલા બોન્ડ છાપવામાં આવ્યા ?
બોન્ડ્સની પ્રિન્ટીંગની જવાબદારી નિભાવતી નાસિક સ્થિત ઈન્ડિયા સિક્યોરિટી પ્રેસે રૂપિયા 1000, 10000, એક લાખ, 10 લાખ અને એક કરોડના મૂલ્યોમાં છપાયેલા બોન્ડની સંખ્યા પણ જાહેર કરી છે. રૂપિયા 1000 મૂલ્યના 2,65,000, રૂપિયા 10,000 મૂલ્યના 2,65,000, રૂપિયા એક લાખના મૂલ્યના 93,000, રૂપિયા 10 લાખના મૂલ્યના 26,000 અને રૂપિયા એક કરોડના મુલ્યના 33,000 બોન્ડ છાપવામાં આવ્યા હતા. રસપ્રદ વાત એ છે કે, આ બોન્ડના પ્રિન્ટિંગ અને મેનેજમેન્ટનો ખર્ચ દાન આપનારાઓ કે લેનારાઓ દ્વારા નહીં, પરંતુ સરકાર અને કરદાતા (Taxpayer)ઓ દ્વારા ઉઠાવવામાં આવે છે.
બોન્ડની પ્રિન્ટિંગનો ખર્ચ પણ કરદાતાઓના નાણાંથી
બત્રાએ કહ્યું કે, ‘ઇલેક્ટોરલ બોન્ડ સ્કીમની વિડંબના એવી છે કે બોન્ડ ખરીદનારા દાતાઓએ SBIને કોઈપણ સર્વિસ ચાર્જ (કમિશન) ચૂકવવાનો અને ચૂંટણી બોન્ડની પ્રિન્ટિંગનો ખર્ચ ચુકવવાની જરૂર નથી. આ ખર્ચને સરકાર અથવા કરદાતા ચૂકવે છે. આ ઉપરાંત રાજકીય પક્ષોને જે કરમુક્ત લાભો માટે, ચૂંટણી બોન્ડ યોજનાના સંચાલન માટે સરકારી મશીનરી અને કર્મચારીઓનો ઉપયોગ કરવામાં આવે છે, તેની પાછળ પણ મોટી રકમનો ખર્ચ કરવામાં આવી રહ્યો હતો અને તે માટે પણ કરદાતાઓના નાણાંનો ઉપયોગ થયો હતો.
ચૂંટણી બોન્ડ પર કેન્દ્ર-રાજ્યની છ ટકા GST
બત્રા દ્વારા અગાઉ દાખલ કરાયેલી અન્ય RTIમાં પણ ખુલાસો થયો હતો કે, નરેન્દ્ર મોદી સરકારે 2024માં જ રૂપિયા એક કરોડના મૂલ્યના 8,350 ઈલેક્ટોરલ બોન્ડ છાપ્યા હતા, જ્યારે સુપ્રીમ કોર્ટે નવેમ્બર 2023માં યોજનાની બંધારણીયતા પર પોતાનો ચુકાદો અનામત રાખી દીધો હતો. મીડિયા રિપોર્ટ મુજબ એક ચૂંટણી બોન્ડ છાપવાની ખર્ચ 25 રૂપિયા થાય છે, જેમાં કેન્દ્ર સરકાર અને રાજ્ય સરકાર બંને 6 ટકાનો વધારાનો જીએસટી લગાવે છે.
ઉલ્લેખનિય છે કે, સુપ્રીમ કોર્ટે 15 ફેબ્રુઆરીએ ચૂંટણી બોન્ડ યોજનાને રદ કરી દીધી હતી. તેને ગેરબંધારણીય અને મતદારોના માહિતીના અધિકારનું ઉલ્લંઘન ગણાવતા કોર્ટે એસબીઆઈને બોન્ડની વિગતો ચૂંટણી પંચને સબમિટ કરવાનો નિર્દેશ આપ્યો હતો.

Unveiling a 'People's Manifesto' Towards Restoration of Constitutional Justice: Avinash Kumar and Aditi Anand

The Wire: National: Friday, 19 April 2024.
With elections around the corner, there is a need to re-introduce public conversation around what development actually means, and also to present to the political class the imminent needs of people towards ensuring constitutional justice.

With the elections due to commence in just about a fortnight and almost all the equations and arithmetic worked out with institutionalised eco chambers parroting their own narratives, it is imperative to underline a few basic principles for a thriving electoral democracy, i.e. if we truly want to preserve its spirit.
First and foremost, to evaluate a government’s performance report card on the fundamental parameters of constitutional values (guaranteeing fundamental rights like freedom of expression and association, right to equality and non-discrimination and an equal playing field for all, just to name a few); second, holding the outgoing government accountable to its own promises of developmental policies and eventually deepening the established principle of electoral democracy that the idea of winning numbers in a democracy is always variable and cannot be decided on the basis of ascriptive identities. And precisely here we run into problem, because if we analyse the current government’s performance on these three principles, we realise that they are simply running into a severe conflict with each other.
If you want to uphold constitutional principles, under whose oath you have formed the government, you wouldn’t jail political dissenters indefinitely, you won’t publicly privilege one religion at the expense of all others, you won’t muzzle independent institutions like media, judiciary and other arms of governance and most importantly you won’t try to fossilise a majority on the basis of primordial identities.
The paradox evident is that the current government did exactly the latter which ran afoul of all the basic constitutional principles during the last decade by publicly proclaiming key promises as part of their successive electoral manifestoes. All its promises which it claims to have met e.g. making of a Ram Temple, abrogation of Article 370 and breaking up of Jammu and Kashmir (the only Muslim majority state) into Union territories, abrogation of Triple Talaq and enactment of Citizenship Amendment Act putting the Muslim citizens of this country under a clear jeopardy, completely destroy the basic values as proclaimed in the Preamble of the constitution and beyond. In such a scenario, how do you hold a government accountable and how do you bring a sense of sanity to the entire discussion?
National and international media is also gung-ho about the 7% growth rate and a booming stock market backed by a so-called successful social services delivery to the poor including ration to the 80 crore people with bank accounts, gas cylinders and toilets. This rhetoric does demand a closer look at the reality which envelops us. This also puts an onus on us to re-initiate a public conversation around the Constitution and re-vitalising the meaning of ‘Achhe Din’ through a renewed battle over the meaning of word ‘development’. Let’s look at some of the doings of the current government in detail from this spirit so that then we can go about asking for what we should be asking for.
Status of democracy
Let’s begin with a quick review of some of the institutions of electoral democracy. The procedural democracy has witnessed hurried passage of Bills without debate, limited engagement of parliamentary committees, reduced sitting days, expulsion of an unprecedented number of opposition parliamentarians, limited budgetary deliberations, restricted access to data for Members of Parliament, and the growing presence of elected representatives with criminal records. For example, in the last parliamentary session, over 25 Bills were passed in just 10 days, leaving little time for thorough examination and debate.
The state of media today reflects how this pillar of democracy is struggling to stay up, in light of increased capital investment from those with business-oriented interests, rising communalism, diminishing space to critique the establishment, and rising attacks on journalists/media organisations not towing ‘the line’. The stark decline of people in the media and publishing industry from 10.3 lakh in 2016 to 2.3 lakh in 2021 clearly evidences the unhealthy trends discussed.
The civic space in India presents a ‘chilling effect’ that has encompassed not just traditional civil society groups but businesses, philanthropy, media, academia, and ordinary citizens alike. This has arisen after students, activists, academics, journalists, artists, actors, comedians, fact-checkers, publishers, and a range of other citizens have been charged under draconian laws for exercising their fundamental freedoms.
Civil society organisations (CSOs) in India have found themselves scrambling to cope with new, onerous regulatory compliance requirements, cancellation of FCRA licenses of over 20,000 NGOs (continuing relentlessly till date) whereas governments worldwide provided fiscal support and/or tax incentives to their non-profit sectors through the pandemic. Along with this, the battle for authentic data has also been hindering the ability of CSOs to analyse policy, design programmes, advocate for the excluded or evaluate impact as the decadal census that was due in 2021 shows no sign of being conducted any time soon and other datasets being suppressed or discredited.
Status of development
India has lacked official poverty data for over a decade, but various studies indicate a significant increase in the number who have come under the bracket since the pandemic, especially among marginalised groups. Structural shifts in the labour market have led to income collapse, savings erosion, and mounting household debt – particularly affecting rural poverty and food insecurity.
Despite robust GDP growth, India remains highly unequal, with the top 10% holding 57% of national income, out of which the top 1% accounts for 22% of it. Conversely, the bottom 50% share has gone down to 13%. Despite economic progress, India’s workforce is moving toward agriculture, with the sector’s share in GDP increasing, yet farmers not being able to access fair prices. The closure of 70% of MSMEs in recent years, which are key contributors to India’s growth, also highlights the need for policy support.
The increasing poverty and inequality also create an emergent need for robust social security measures, but what currently exists is a patchwork of national and state schemes with a wide range of eligibility criteria (inclusions and exclusions), operational procedures and target groups administered by a labyrinth of departments, welfare boards and parastatals. The income inequality is also leading to a state of hunger and poor nutritional status with 70% population unable to afford a nutritious and healthy diet.

Despite the need to direct public resources towards healthcare, a diversion of government funds to the private sector is happening with 75% of PM-JAY payments made to private entities. Among a few silver linings, while only 46% population reported access to safely managed sanitation services in 2020, the Jal Jeevan Mission flagship programme has positively resulted in household tap connection in more than 60% of rural households to date as compared to merely 17% in 2019.
Coming to education, in elementary education, only 25.5% of schools across the country are compliant with the Right to Education Act infrastructure norms with 11 lakh vacant teaching positions (69% in rural) and around 1.2 lakh schools with just 1 teacher. There are overall 27000 less schools than there were in 2014-15 and nearly 85000 government schools have closed since. (See table below) Higher Education Institutes are also experiencing intellectual impoverishment alongside a consistent reduction in state financial support resulting in prominent universities witnessing the appointment of teachers with subpar academic records.

There has been no systematic assessment of the National Action Plan on Climate Change even after almost 15 years since it was launched, while recently passed laws and notifications are set to remove protection from 28% of forest cover, among other changes that put the environment and marginalised communities at risk.
Similarly, the table on Railways despite all the ongoing rhetoric of Vande Bharat Expresses and Bullet trains, tells us a story of how it is increasingly being snatched away from the common people, with a sharp reduction in sleeper berths, a relentless increase in train fares and skyrocketing instances of train cancellations.

Status of marginalised communities
While there is a strong increase in the overall rhetoric on “women’s empowerment”, there is an imminent need to define this empowerment in terms of wage parity, autonomy in decision-making, and addressing structural barriers for women across identities. That is the only way to move towards combating challenges such as the steady incline in crimes against women in the past four years, with over 30,000 complaints made in just the last year.
The National Family Health Survey (NFHS) data shows higher rates of malnutrition and infant mortality among Dalits and Tribals compared to the general population. Similarly, the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data reveals disproportionate rates of violence and discrimination against religious minorities and LGBTQ individuals. Data from the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) highlights the prevalence of caste-based discrimination in access to education, employment, and healthcare. Despite government assurances, empowerment status for Dalits and Tribals remains unchanged, with 347 deaths related to manual scavenging recorded in five years.
Religious minorities face social exclusion, with 31% of Muslims below the poverty line, facing violence and neglect. The National Minorities Development and Finance Corporation (NMDFC), the primary agency for minority economic development saw a 75% reduction in funding in 2023-24. Compounding this impact, is the diminished sense of safety and security in the community, as evidenced by 204 incidents of cow vigilantism since 2014 and 539 incidents of violence against Christians in just nine months of 2023.
Despite passing some progressive laws in recent years, India abstained from voting on the resolution that renewed the mandate for an independent expert to monitor the protection of LGBTQ rights at the United Nations Human Rights Council in 2019 and 2022, casting doubts on the government’s commitment to welfare and empowerment of the community. The government’s commitment to the inclusion of people with disabilities is also under scrutiny with the recent decision to omit the collection of disability-related data from the sixth round of the National Family Health Survey.
The real wages of male agricultural labourers grew by less than 1% between 2014-15 and 2021-22; the number of persons engaged in the farming sector to have committed suicide was nearly 53,000 between 2017-2022.
Status of governance
While the last five Union budgets were presented in the wake of rising unemployment, high inflation, low consumption demand and growing inequality in the country, specific emphasis has been on major infrastructure projects and education, health, and investments for marginalised groups like scheduled castes, tribal communities, religious minorities, women, children, and persons with disabilities have been neglected.
Even as India pioneers e-governance initiatives like UPI, it still leads the world in internet shutdowns, with 44 suspensions of internet services in 2023 impacting 4.32 crore people and causing economic losses worth over Rs. 2000 crores. Balancing technological progress with preserving democratic principles and individual rights in the evolving data governance landscape is a challenge seeing very slow progress. Concerns about increased surveillance and hollow protection for data users loomed large in the new Data Protection Bill 2023 and the Digital India Act, while India’s Freedom House rating also changed from ‘free’ to ‘partly free’ due to government authoritarian actions in 2021.
Twelve CAG reports tabled in the parliament in August 2023 revealed corruption and irregularities in the functioning of several Union government ministries and departments. The only effective way to fight corruption in a democracy as vast as India is to empower citizens with appropriate tools and institutions to hold the government and its functionaries accountable. However, unfortunately, the track record of the current dispensation has been marked by a consistent undermining of legislations and institutions of transparency and accountability.
With continued multi-pronged attacks on basic human rights for all, especially for the most marginalised, the last five years stand out for an intentional redefinition and abuse of human rights on the ground and obscurantist chicanery. This gesture in no way expands the scope of peoples’ power to seek accountability from the state to uphold their fundamental rights which should ideally be the core premise for a democratically elected government.
Conclusion
It is in this context that there is a need to re-introduce a public conversation around what ‘development’ means and for whom? Is the status of India being the fifth largest economy (based on a very narrow economic base) more important than the fact that the country is witnessing some of the highest rates of unemployment and hunger hitherto unseen? Is the significant middle class more critical than the significantly larger number of impoverished informalised labour and farmers?
There is an urgent need to re-introduce certain principles of Constitutional rights within which the idea of development could be re-defined. The following demands reflect the imminent need for re-establishing values of the Constitution of India while upholding a rights-based language across sectors and broadly make calls across the following political parties and the future government to:

• Ensure Inclusion of the marginalised communities in political and policy-making spaces
• Ensure State and business accountability through an independent and transparent mechanism
• Ensure protection from human rights violations of all
• Ensure independence and autonomy of other pillars of democracy: judiciary, media and other allied institutions

Below are a set of detailed sector-wise demands based on a large-scale deliberation with civil society groups and communities across India which could hopefully provide a pathway for a renewed social contract between people and the state.
Education 

• Make adequate allocation for education by ensuring that it does not fall below 6% of the GDP
• Extend the purview of the RTE Act from birth to 18 years in line with the internationally recognized definition of childhood by including ECCE, pre-primary and higher secondary education as a legal entitlement.
• Stop the increase of commercialization and privatisation of education and enforce accountability of private schools and ECCE Centres by drafting, implementing and enforcing a national regulatory framework including regulation of fees, compliance with quality norms and addressing social segregation through the growth of private provision
• Review and revise the National Education Policy to realise the right to education
• Increase budgets for direct benefit schemes like Post-Matric Scholarships, National Overseas Scheme, Hostels, and Skill Development schemes, and timely disbursal of cash to the recipients.

Food Security and Nutrition

• Quotas under the National Food Security Act should be immediately expanded on the basis of the population projections for 2023 to cover 67% of population
• Truly universalise the Public Distribution System to include all vulnerable persons
• Ensure decentralized grievance redressal mechanisms under NFSA
• Reinstate eggs/equally protein-packed substitutes in meals, incorporating dal etc. instead of just cereals to combat undernutrition and malnutrition

Health

• Immediately initiate legislation on “Right to Health and Healthcare” in larger context of major expansion and strengthening of Public health services.
• Increase public allocations on health care to at least 3% of GDP
• Scrap schemes like PM-JAY that are directing government funds to private health systems and instead use these resources to strengthen the public health system
• Strengthen death reporting system; ensuring rights of records and certificates; and, ensuring public dissemination of gender, caste disaggregated data on morbidity, mortality and utilisation

Agriculture and farmer welfare

• Farmers’ incomes must be enhanced by guaranteeing MSP for all crops which gives the farmers at least 50 per cent returns after covering all input costs of capital and the rent on the land.
• Address farm debt by regulating input prices, strengthening state support and curbing extortionary private moneylending practices
• Land reforms must be re-initiated and excess of ceiling land must be given to landless farmers
• Stagnating rural minimum wages must be raised and employment opportunities must expand

Employment

• Combat rising inequalities and income disparity at all economic and extra-economic levels for all marginalised communities
• Substantially increase allocations to MGNREGA to increase employment opportunities in rural areas
• Develop and build institutional mechanisms to promote entrepreneurial education along with affordable and inclusive access to financial and capacity building institutions towards promoting entrepreneurship and self-employment among youth in the growing market opportunities.
• Horizontal reservations for transgender persons with 1% of seats from the general OBC, SC and ST categories would be reserved for trans* people coming from socially marginalised communities
• Realise women’s empowerment in terms of wage parity, autonomy in decision-making, and addressing structural barriers for women across identities.
• Given that sexual harassment at the workplace and the burden of unpaid care work are deterrents to women’s workforce participation, urgent implementation of preventive and protective measures such maternity benefits, creche facilities at the workplace and sensitization and awareness-raising on the POSH Act are required to ensure an increase in women’s economic participation.
• Appropriate schemes should be adopted and implemented for the economic development of minorities for skilling their youths and providing them easy bank loans for promoting entrepreneurship.
• Ensure rightful wages for Anganwadi workers, Sathins, Sahyoginis, etc. and their labour

Economy

• Re-introduce wealth and inheritance tax towards a re-distributive justice
• Raise corporate taxes to 65% by adding 1% rise in surcharges for the richest 7% of Indians and increase direct taxes to combat revenue losses and uncollected taxes and fund universal healthcare, education, social security, and welfare for all citizens.
• Dedicate policy support towards enabling Micro, Small and Medium

Recognising the multidimensionality of urban poverty: Apart from employment and incomes, urban poverty is closely linked with various other forms of deprivation – lack of housing, basic services (water, sanitation), basic infrastructure (health, education) and social security. Thus, all these dimensions of urban poverty need to be tackled simultaneously.
Enterprises with regular and stable employment generation and formal social security given to all

• Design and revise policies centrally focusing on the urgency to prioritise equitable and inclusive gendersensitive sustainable and sustained livelihood opportunities

Social Security
 

• Strengthen existing schemes such as Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF), Employees’ State Insurance Scheme (ESI) and National Social Assistance Programme (NSAP) with budgetary support and expansion of coverage
• Ensure ‘Social Protection Floor’ including ESI benefits, EPF benefits, maternity benefits, and all other essential human wellbeing benefits
• Revise Code on Social Security 2020 to lay down a clear map for moving towards an integrated, universal and adaptive social protection system encompassing the whole life-cycle of a citizen
• Revise Code on Social Security, 2020 to address implementation obstacles due to overlapping authority between central and state administrative and financial structures
• Procedural Safeguards Against Internet Shutdowns and ensuring access to social security programmes under the NREGA and Food Security Act, irrespective of internet availability

Livelihood

• Rehabilitation entitlements to be provided under the 2013 scheme, including alternate livelihood options, financial assistance, housing, and education support to the children of the persons engaged in manual scavenging
• Build incentives for usages of latrines and keeping them functional rather than construction of toilets
• Continue to reinforce further campaigns like Community Led Total Sanitation under SBM 2.0 for ODF and ODF + and finally ODF ++ to bring in sustainable behaviour change.

Justice

• Undertake review and repeal anti-terror laws including UAPA that restrict freedom of speech and expression.
• Repeal the offence of sedition in Section 124A of the IPC as undemocratic and unconstitutional.
• Laws for controlling the communal discrimination and violence should be passed by the Parliament and enacted. A separate law should be enacted against the mob lynching as advised by the Supreme Court of India.
• Enact the Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence Bill and review and repeal the following anti-minority laws within one year: CAA 2019; All “anti-conversion” laws which target religious minorities.

Climate Change

• Enhance the budget for climate actions under the DAPSC-DAPST proportionate to SC and ST population, Gender budget and Child budget, considering regional and socio-economic vulnerabilities and exposure to climate risks
• Establish a strong institutional mechanism solely focused on climate action and policy
• Update the National Action Plan on Climate Change and reconstitute the Prime Minister’s Council on Climate Change
• Give proper directions and financial backing to all State Action Plans on Climate Change
• Support for environment-based livelihoods such as fishing, forest produce, through measures to enhance production and marketing with fair pricing

Governance

• Mandate specific timeframes and deadlines for the comprehensive discussion and review of each Bill
• Refer complex Bills promptly to the parliamentary committees headed by opposition members for thorough scrutiny
• Make regulatory regime easier for NGOs in terms of annual registration
• Roll back the restrictive measures imposed on NGOs regarding sub-granting, administration expense cap and others
• Recognise Voluntary organisations contribution to nation building
• Have a strict political drive to implement PESA and give adequate power to the gram Sabhas through a transparent grievance redressal mechanism while also organising a large scale awareness campaigns round rights under PESA and other state level laws in forest areas.

Transparency

• Re-introduce the ‘Right of Citizens for Time Bound Delivery of Goods and Services and Redressal of their Grievances Bill, 2011’ (GR Bill)
• Implement the Whistle Blowers Act passed in 2014
• Provide autonomy to the Lokpal and Lokayktas with regards to scope of operations and tenure and type of appointments
• Reconsider Rule 22 of the RTI Act, which effectively allows the government to fix different tenures for different information commissioners.
• Reconsider amendments to the RTI Act introduced in Parliament in 2019 that empowers the central government to decide the tenure and salaries of all commissioners in the country.
• Meaningful Public Consultation on the Data Protection Act (DPDPA) 2023
• Inclusion of the “public trust doctrine” in the new Digital Indian Act

Inclusion

• Utilise demographic data on human development and deprivations for the SC and ST populations from government data points to inform livelihood, climate etc. missions and schemes
• Ensure rights of adivasi communities on ancestral land, and not displacing them for kijibg and other activities without consent
• There needs to be strict collection of data along with focus on disaggregated data on disability for targeted policy reforms.
• Elimination of all direct human contact with faecal matter during sanitation work.
• Re-energisation of the redress system for gender-based violence through optimal utilization of the Nirbhaya fund. A fund to be included under Mission Shakti for gender sensitisation of all personnel who provide first-responder services.
• Recognise violence against women as a public health issue and build synergies with the Health and Social Justice and other ministries of the government.
• Significantly increase allocation of Union Budgets (up to 6 per cent of the total Budget) and state level public investments on children to address the impacts of COVID-19, especially on the marginalised children, improve the rate of undernourished and anaemic children in the country, implement the new NEP 2020 in its full spirit, and create safer environments and spaces for all children to grow up in a healthy manner free from crime and violence.
• Youth should be seen as equal partners as opposed to junior partners in national building, and they should be given representation in governance structures, beginning with the third tier of government Panchayati Raj Institutions and Urban Local Bodies.
• The budget of scholarship schemes for minorities should be made at par with the SCs who almost match with the former in the demographic attributes.
• The left-out recommendations of Sachar Committee should be approved for implementation such as the establishment of a databank on minorities and promotion of diversity in the country.
• The schemes undertaken for the welfare and development of minorities should be strengthened by conducive policies and due fiscal support.

(Avinash Kumar and Aditi Anand work with Wada Na Todo Abhiyan, which is a people-led campaign, formed by 3000+ Civil Society Organisations in 2004, to promote governance accountability while reflecting the needs and voices of marginalized communities.)

Motor Vehicle Department violates the law by revealing the identity of RTI activists: MB Babu

Mathrubhumi: Kerala: Friday, 19 April 2024.

The Motor Vehicles Department had recently published the queries received under the RTI Act, followed by the answers provided to them along with the full details of the persons who raised the queries. By violating the basic RTI rule by publishing the personal information of the people who raised these queries on the official website, the motor vehicle department has landed in hot water. In the website’s citizen corner, 300 questions and answers were displayed under the RTI Q&A section.
Both the addresses and phone numbers of those who raised the question have been mentioned on the website. A 30-page document was uploaded that had information about these 300 people.
According to the Right to Information Law, when questions and answers are published, there is a provision that the part containing the personal information of those raising these questions should be deleted, which the Motor Vehicle Department violated. There are numerous court orders support this law.
The rule was accepted with a view to the possibility of a person being attacked over their remarks by people who are against it. The Constitution also guarantees the right to privacy.

The making and unmaking of the Electoral Bond Scheme: Part 2: Gauri Kashyap

Supreme Court Observer: Delhi: Thursday, 18 April 2024.
Several elections came and went before the top Court heard the case on merits. Yet, petitioners believe their eventual victory is not hollow

This is the second and final part of our feature on the Electoral Bond Scheme. Part 1 is here. You can access the case background and detailed hearing reports here.
A counsel’s opening remarks in a case can often set the mood in a hearing, especially in matters of national importance. On the first day of hearings in the challenge to Article 370, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal bellowed: “This is indeed, according to me, a historic moment in many ways.” This was followed by a dramatic pause. “First, [the Court] would be analysing why history was tossed out on the 6th of August 2019….whether the will of the people of Jammu and Kashmir could be silenced in this fashion.” Even through a livestream, one could sense the air in the Court change immediately.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan’s opening arguments in the Electoral Bonds case may not have had the same effect. When he began by saying “First of all, My Lord, I wish to say that this is a case which goes to the very root of our democracy,” the Chief Justice was talking to his Court Masters, requesting certain books to be handed over. Bhushan waited, committed to delivering the compelling opener. “I have been in the PIL space for many years,” he continued, “but I have never seen this kind of public interest involved in any PIL that I have ever done.”
For the average citizen, the words ‘Electoral Bond’ might not quite ring in the ear as ‘Jammu and Kashmir’ but there’s no doubt that the case was one where every voter in a representative democracy had a stake. At its heart, it was about the voter’s right to know who is funding political parties.
Fittingly, the Right to Information framework played a pivotal role in how the events played out. Citizen-activists relied on it to extract information that supported their challenge of the Scheme. Journalists used some of the information to reconstruct how the Scheme was bulldozed through the bureaucratic apparatus, despite bodies like the Reserve Bank of India and the Election Commission having clear reservations. We covered this latter story in Part 1 of this feature. In this part, we tell the story of what transpired in the Supreme Court. It was a long and arduous battle for the petitioners.
First challenges, sales cycles
The Electoral Bonds Scheme had been notified on 2 January 2018, but the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) had already approached the Court in September 2017. President Pranab Mukherjee assented to the 2017 Finance Bill in April that year. ADR’s petition referred to the Scheme as making the “unholy nexus between politics and corporate houses more opaque and treacherous.” Shivani Kapoor, from ADR’s legal team, told me that they had a sense of how opaque the Scheme was long before the notification. “We decided then and there that we are going to challenge it,” she said. “If people don’t know, how will they question?”
Two weeks after the Scheme’s notification, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) joined ADR in mounting a legal challenge. It would be the only political party to challenge the Scheme in its own name. Advocate Shadan Farasat, CPI(M)’s lawyer, told the Supreme Court Observer that the brief from his client was very clear: “They had a principled stance that this is an opaque scheme, which far from curing the ills of electoral financing, is going to worsen it.”
Together, the petitioners contended that the Scheme threatened free and fair elections as voters were deprived of crucial information on the allegiances of their representatives. The petitioners also challenged the way in which the Scheme was introduced it had been pushed through as a Money Bill when it clearly wasn’t.
Ultimately, there were no substantial hearings on the merits of the case for six years. When the matter did come up between 2017 and October 2023, it was because petitioners filed interim applications in the face of an upcoming election or a cycle of bond sales (The bonds were sold for a 10-day period every quarter).
Interim applications, matching columns
In this period, the most notable series of hearings and orders came during the 2019 General Election. Over a month before the polls began, on 5 March 2019, petitioners sought a stay on the Scheme. They had raised concerns that the Bharatiya Janata Party, which was in power,  was the beneficiary of 95 percent of donations through bonds. The Union government had responded by saying that the success of the Scheme could only be gauged after the results of the election were announced. Then Attorney General K. K. Venugopal argued that “The government must be allowed a free hand to implement measures in execution of policies framed…”
On 12 April 2019, as the General Election was underway, the Court stated that an interim relief that “tilt(s) the balance in favour of either of the parties” must be avoided. Instead, it decided to ask all political parties to disclose details of donations received through Electoral Bonds to the Election Commission of India in a sealed cover. This was a victory for the Union government because the petitioners had asked for the Scheme to be stayed or for the Court to issue an order directing the public disclosure of the names of the purchasing and receiving parties.
On 29 November 2019, ADR filed another interim application. No substantial hearings took place. In October 2020, close on the heels of the State Bank of India opening up another sale window, ADR filed yet another application to alert the Court that the present window was suspiciously close to the Bihar legislative assembly elections. There had been no sales in April to July that year.
On 9 March 2021, petitioners approached the Court again. This time, state elections in West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Puducherry and Assam were around the corner. On 26 March 2021, the Court rejected the interim application. That “the Scheme is intended to ensure that everything happens only through banking channels” seemed sufficient basis for the CJI S.A. Bobde-led three-judge Bench to dismiss the interim application.
The Court also dismissed arguments that the Scheme facilitated foreign funding, stating that the “contention arises out of ignorance of the Scheme” as only Indian citizens are permitted to purchase the bonds. They found no merit in ADR’s argument that the Scheme did not have safeguards against trading of bonds, as the “first buyer will not stand to gain anything out of such sale except losing white money for the black.”
Further, the Court said, the State Bank of India had all the information on transactions due to the collection of KYC details of the buyer, and that companies were required to disclose donations in their financial statements. “All that is required is a little more effort to cull out such information from both sides (purchaser of bond and political party) and do some ‘match the following’,” they said.
The Court also said “that there cannot be repeated applications seeking the same relief, merely because the interim reliefs sought, relates to something that is to happen at periodical intervals of time.”
In November 2022, the Scheme was amended to increase the number of days of sale from 10 to 15 in a year of several assembly elections. With the Interim Application route precluded due to the Court’s previous order, ADR and other petitioners filed an additional affidavit stating that the amendment had been made to ensure that donations increased around election season. The petitioners also filed a supplementary affidavit pointing out that the amendment was introduced while the Model Code of Conduct was in force for the 2022 Assembly elections in Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh.
The case inched forward when the year turned. On 31 January 2023, heeding to the petitioners’ request, the Court bifurcated the case into three separate issues—challenges to the Electoral Bond Scheme; political parties as public authorities under the RTI Act; and the validity of the amendments to the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010. The legal question on the use of money bills to pass amendments will be heard along with the challenge to the amendments to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
On 16 October 2023, the petitioners approached the Court again to request a speedy hearing and for the case to be referred to a five-judge Constitution Bench. The 2024 General Election was only months away. Time was running out again.
Information blackholes, practical politics
Finally, on 31 October 2023, the hearings began. “There are 23 lakh registered companies in India. 23 lakh!” Prashant Bhushan exclaimed during the hearings, responding to the Court’s earlier suggestion to embark on a “match the following” exercise to track transactions. The exercise was not something that even civil society organisations could reasonably take on, so there was no question of the average voter doing so. Bhushan insisted that though the voter is kept in the dark, the Union government could extract information by exerting pressure on the State Bank of India, which was in its control.
Farasat, appearing for CPI(M) submitted that the Electoral Bonds Scheme was a “legally ordained information blackhole” which violates the idea of an “informed electorate” under Articles 19(1)(a) and 326.
The crux of the matter, petitioners argued, was that the Scheme’s much-vaunted quality of anonymity was a hoax. “Let’s talk practical politics,” Kapil Sibal said. He was arguing for petitioner Dr. Jaya Thakur, who is associated with the Madhya Pradesh women’s wing of the Congress party. Sibal suggested that any company that makes a large donation that has the flavour of a kickback will itself approach the beneficiary political party with the news of their purchase.
Sure enough, corporate donations formed a massive chunk of the bonds purchased. ADR’s research, which Bhushan submitted to the Constitution Bench, showed that 94.25 percent (₹12,999 crore) of all the bonds purchased between March 2018 to July 2023 were in the ₹1 crore denomination. “Capital and influence go hand in hand,” Sibal said in Court.
Hopeful hearings, clouds of doubt
When I asked Bhushan about the proceedings, he said that the Constitution Bench gave the petitioners “a good hearing.” “From their body language and from their questions, we were confident that they would probably allow our petition,” he said. “The questions they asked were mostly for the government. With us, they were mostly listening and trying to understand all the laws that had been amended, et cetera.”
Farasat, too, recalled the Bench being alive to the arguments about transparency and the voters’ right to information. “You get a sense, normally, by the end of the hearing,” he said. “Of course, one never knows fully. But from the questions, from the responses, and how they receive different arguments, one does have a broad professional sense of where the matter is going.”
Through the three days, the Court asked questions about how the Scheme played out practically. Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud zeroed in on the untraceability of the Bonds. “They say trading is prohibited, but there’s no way you can prohibit trading in the bond,” he said. Since the only information sought by the bank was the KYC details of the purchaser, one could simply appoint a person to make the purchase officially for a small fee. A donor with the vested interest could back the purchaser of the bond, exchange it with a political party in return for favours, and never have their name come up in the flow of transactions. Justice Sanjiv Khanna added “Because of the curtain, there cannot be any questions with regard to quid pro quo.”
The Court also spent considerable time on the issue of the Scheme creating an uneven playing field among parties. Petitioners had argued that “more than 50 percent of the donations have been received only by the ruling party at the Centre and the rest have been received only by the ruling party in the States.”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, on his part, had retorted that this couldn’t be helped. But the Bench was alive to the power imbalance inherent in the circumstance. CJI Chandrachud stated, “The party in power is in a much more vantage position (sic) to secure a greater amount of funding through the electoral bonds because of its ability to dole out a quid pro quo in the form of government contracts or government leases or licences or concessions. Or policy changes which will benefit that particular industry.”
Though the Court’s sharp observations had raised hopes among the petitioners, they were aware that getting a decision in their favour was not a cinch. Bhushan told me he was particularly wary because, in the recent past, the Supreme Court had ruled in favour of the government in matters where he felt that the Union didn’t have a strong case. He specifically referred to the Court’s refusal to order a Special Investigative Team (SIT) probe into the Adani-Hindenburg controversy, and the series of decisions in the Gyanvapi Mosque case, including its refusal to hear a plea against the permission granted by a Varanasi court to conduct Hindu pujas in the mosque. Bhushan also brought up what he said was a pattern of assignment of personal liberty cases to specific benches. (He had previously written an open letter to the CJI about irregularities in the listing of cases.)
Shadan Farasat’s concern was that the Court could have said that there was a confidentiality element in the Scheme which they couldn’t breach.
Sufficient gaps, illegitimate acts
The concerns of the petitioners’ counsel were laid to rest when the Court unanimously held the Scheme to be unconstitutional on 15 February 2024. “The Scheme is not fool-proof,” they said, rejecting the idea that it offered confidentiality. “There are sufficient gaps in the Scheme which enable political parties to know the particulars of the contributions made to them.” CJI Chandrachud, writing on behalf of three other judges wrote that “electoral bonds provide economically resourced contributors who already have a seat at the table selective anonymity vis-à-vis the public and not the political party.”
The Court also upheld voters’ right to information: “We are of the opinion that the information about funding to a political party is essential for a voter to exercise their freedom to vote in an effective manner.”
The Court categorically rejected the Union’s contention that the Scheme’s tackling of black money was sufficient reason to restrict voters’ right to information. They found that “the purpose of curbing black money is not traceable to any of the grounds in Article 19(2).” Even if curbing black money was understood to be a legitimate goal, there were other legitimate and non-restrictive ways to achieve this, such as electronic transfers and Electoral Trusts.
On privacy, the Court held that privacy of political affiliation was part of the right to expression of political beliefs guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a). However, the Court saw that the Scheme only grants privacy to donors at the cost of voters, and not against political parties as promised. Since there was “no constitutional hierarchy between the right to information and the right to informational privacy of political affiliation,” the Court had to decide if the restriction on information in this instance balanced out the right to privacy. They found that it did not. The Scheme ensured that the voter never found out about the donations.
Further, there was already a mechanism under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Income Tax Act, 1961 to ensure that donations below ₹20,000 (a threshold the Court said Parliament had set in its wisdom) did not have to be disclosed.
Finally, they held that companies cannot be allowed to donate unlimited amounts of money to political parties. Amendments to the Companies Act, 2013 had removed any eligibility criteria. Allowing any company whether they were profit-making or not to donate allowed them “unrestrained influence…on the electoral process.”
Rivers of cash, public trust
My one question to the activists and lawyers associated with the case was: why does this case matter? RTI responses collected by transparency activists, and data put together by ADR showed that in the 30 phases of sale between 2018 and 2024, a total of ₹16,518.10 crore worth of bonds had been sold. In contrast, data put together by the Centre for Media Studies show that between ₹55,000-60,000 crore was collectively spent by political parties during the 2019 General Election. In the river of cash that is constantly flowing towards political parties through means fair and foul, what was the extent of the impact of ₹16,000 crores of electoral bond money?
Bhushan told me that there was a much larger issue at play beyond the quantum: democracy itself. In India’s multi-party system, in his view, a scheme like Electoral Bonds “skewed the level playing field.”
Indeed, there has been a slew of reporting on these lines in the past few weeks. At ₹1,368 crores, Future Gaming and Hotel Services, a leading lottery company in India, emerged as the biggest corporate donor. The company has reportedly been under investigation for money laundering. Megha Engineering and Infrastructures Ltd was second with a total donation value of ₹966 crores. The company has reportedly won several giant government tenders including ones to build the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Project worth ₹1.15 lakh crore and the Thane-Borivali Twin Tunnel Project for ₹14,400 crore.
Farasat said that it was now up to the Opposition to figure out what to make of the fact that the “government flagship scheme for electoral funding has been found to be blatantly unconstitutional.” “They need to decide how to speak about it to the public,” he said.
Amrita Johri, member of the Satark Nagrik Sangathan (SNS) and National Campaign for People’s Right to Information (NCPRI), told me that it all boiled down to trust. “I think the Scheme has created suspicion in the mind of the public. And I think that you have to judge government actions from a prism of public trust.” Johri was part of the team that filed the early RTIs around the Scheme.
“All of this is very much about citizens feeling that their vote counts,” said Anjali Bhardwaj, a transparency activist and co-founder of SNS and NCPRI. “Who I am electing should actually be working for me as a citizen and not for a corporate interest or an industry simply because that’s where they are getting money from.”

Give information sought by IAS officer on inquiries against him: Haryana info panel: Written by Sukhbir Siwach

The Indian Express: Chandigarh: Thursday, 18 April 2024.

Asserting that a senior IAS officer has every right to obtain information about the approvals of two inquiries launched against him by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), the Haryana State Information Commission has directed the state information officer to provide IAS officer D Suresh with the related information within 15 days.
State Chief Information Commissioner Vijai Vardhan Tuesday asked an under-secretary level officer of the state Chief Secretary’s office to provide Suresh, the Principal Resident Commissioner of Haryana Bhavan in New Delhi, with the information.
Suresh already has at least three inquiries instituted against him in connection with plot allotment cases in 2019 when he was the chief administrator of the Haryana Urban Development Authority (now HSVP). He is accused of causing financial losses to the state exchequer, an allegation denied by him. In one of the inquiries, the Haryana government had in July 2023 approved the Anti-Corruption Bureau (earlier, State Vigilance Bureau) to probe the officer in a related FIR.
In August 2023, Suresh sought information about noting sheets, orders and approvals relating to the three inquiries against him.
However, an under-secretary rank officer, Jitender Singla, who is the state public information officer in the Chief Secretary’s office, informed the State Information Commission that the solicited information was denied under section 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act, 2005 to the appellant as two inquiries conducted by the ACB are under consideration of the government.
On the other hand, the IAS officer alleged that all the three inquiries conducted against him by the ACB were “illegal” because “no requisite/mandatory permission under section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was taken from the government”.
After hearing averments of both parties, the Information Commission noted that “as per SOP dated 03.09.2021, the version of the appellant appears to be correct that against a public servant drawing pay at level 14 and 15 (as per the Seventh Pay Commission and its equivalent), only Director General of Police and Additional Director General of Police or equivalent can be assigned inquiry under section 17 A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. In the instant case, the inquiry has been reportedly conducted by an officer who was engaged on a contractual basis after retirement.”
Referring to a Delhi High Court judgment, the Commission observed that “if the solicited information is not shared with the appellant, it would be tantamount to a violation of the principles of natural justice”. The Commission also observed that “to defend himself, the appellant (the IAS officer) has the right to obtain information solicited by him”.
The Information Commission further noted that in his letter to the IAS officer, the State Public Information Officer (SPIO) merely stated that the disclosure of vigilance-related information would impede the process of inquiry/investigation and hence the solicited information was denied.
“Thus, it is clear that the respondent SPIO has failed to reveal or mention how the disclosure of the solicited information would ‘impede’ the process of investigation as has been held by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in its judgment dated 05.02. 2021…the appellant (IAS officer) has every right to obtain the solicited information relating to approvals of enquiry no. 13, 14, and approval granted under section 17A of the PC Act, 1988 to defend himself,” observed Vardhan, who was earlier the Chief Secretary of Haryana.

Provide info to D Suresh on inquiries: Chief Information Commissioner: Bhartesh Singh Thakur

Tribune India: Chandigarh: Thursday, 18 April 2024.

The Chief Information Commissioner (CIC), Haryana, Vijai Vardhan, has ordered the Under Secretary, Vigilance Department, in the office of Chief Secretary, to provide information to IAS officer D Suresh related to two inquiries against him and approval granted under Section 17 A of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Probe illegal, claims IAS officer
The IAS officer has contended that all three ACB inquiries against him were “illegal” as mandatory permission under Section 17 A was not taken.
The order, dated April 15, said: “According to the principles of natural justice, the appellant (IAS officer D Suresh) has every right to obtain the solicited information relating to approvals of inquiry No. 13, 14 and approval granted u/s 17 A of the PC Act, 1988, so as to defend himself”. It added, “The Commission further observes that Section 8(1)(j) and 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005, enables and empowers the appellant (IAS officer D Suresh) to obtain the solicited information as it relates to him specifically and not to any ‘third party’.”
Vide his RTI application, dated August 10, 2023, D Suresh had sought information “relating to noting sheets, orders, approvals relating to inquiries no. 12, 13 and 14 and 17 A approvals”. As inquiries no. 13 and 14 conducted by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) are under the consideration of the government, Jitender Singla, SPIO-cum-Under Secretary, Vigilance Department, told the CIC that the solicited information was denied u/s 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.

Electoral Bonds: Govt Spent Nearly Rs14 Crore, Including Commission to SBI, Printing Cost and GST, Reveals RTI

Moneylife: National: Thursday, 18 April 2024.
The Union government spent nearly Rs14 crore on electoral bonds, including commission paid to State Bank of India (SBI) for selling the bonds, bill paid for printing the bonds and 18% goods and service tax (GST), reveals information obtained under Right to Information (RTI) Act.
Reply received from the department of economic affairs (DEA), under the Union ministry of finance (MoF), by Commodore (Cmde) Lokesh Batra (retd), shows that consequent to the sale of electoral bonds in 30 phases, Rs12.04 crore has been levied (by SBI) as commission, out of which the government has paid Rs11.60 crore for sale of bonds in 29 phases. "Commission for the phase XXX is under consideration for payment," the central public information officer (CPIO) of DEA says.
Further, the CPIO says 6.82 lakh electoral bonds have been printed till 16 April 2024.

For printing electoral bonds, the government has been charged Rs1.90 crore and Rs6,720 towards a 'device to verify mask-a-print security'. "The final bill for the printing of 8,350 bonds (of Rs1 crore denomination) has not been received by the government of India till date," the CPIO says.
To date, the government has paid Rs1.90 crore, including GST, to Indian Security Press (ISP) at Nashik for printing electoral bonds.
Separately, the ISP informed Cmde Batra that it has printed and supplied 8,350 electoral bonds with a denomination of Rs1 crore to the Union government. ISP's cost for printing these 8,350 bonds is Rs3.72 lakh.

Information provided by the PIO of ISP shows that on 16 different dates from 1 March 2018 to 21 February 2024, it has printed and supplied 6,82,600 electoral bonds to the government. ISP charged Rs1.93 crore, including GST, as printing and supply charges to the Union government.
Last month, coming down heavily on SBI for sharing selective information on electoral bonds, the Supreme Court directed the lender to completely disclose all details in its possession, including the alphanumeric code on each EB.
"In the judgement, we had expressly asked the SBI to disclose all details. The language of the judgement was 'all details will have to be disclosed'. Therefore, that includes the bond number as well. Let SBI not be selective in disclosure of the details," said the constitution bench headed by the chief justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud.
"Now, SBI will not only disclose the bond number, but it shall also file an affidavit again saying that it has not withheld any details," the five-judge bench, also comprising justice Sanjiv Khanna, justice BR Gavai, justice JB Padriwala and justice Manoj Misra, said.
In response, senior counsel Harish Salve, appearing for SBI, said: "We will give every bit of information which we have."
On 20 March 2024, SBI disclosed all the details of the electoral bonds, which were in its possession and custody, to the election commission of India (ECI).
On 2 January 2018, the MoF notified the EB scheme. As per the scheme, an electoral bond is a bond issued like a promissory note. It could be purchased by a person who is a citizen of India or entities incorporated or established in India. The bonds were issued in multiples of Rs1,000, Rs10,000, Rs1 lakh, Rs10 lakh and Rs1 crore.
These were available at specified branches of SBI, and any account holder compliant with know-your-customer (KYC) norms could buy these bonds. Donors could donate the bonds to their party of choice, which then be encashed by the party's verified account within 15 days. The bond did not carry the name of the buyer or the payee.
The recipient political party was not required to disclose who it has received the bond from in its account. Neither did the donor entity have to state to which party it has donated. Also, as per the scheme, only eligible political parties with a 1% vote share were eligible to buy electoral bonds.