Author Profile
“It is very much possible to write an RTI application in 250 words,” a lawyer friend recently told me. He even showed me a few applications that he had drafted. All within the stipulated 250 words, as mandated by a draft RTI rule proposed by the department of personnel and training (DoPT) for applications demanding information from government offices.
It was disconcerting to note that somebody who had been using the legislation in larger public interest seemed in favour of this word restriction.
“The law has just completed five years. It is catching on as a tool of empowerment. Is it appropriate to attach riders to it at this stage?” I asked him.
He replied, much like the department which has proposed the limit in the first place, “Long queries have nothing but explanations in them while the idea is just to write pointed questions demanding information. Lengthy applications waste the resources of the applicant as well as that of the government.” He added that 250 words was a reasonable limit and that applications could easily be drafted within this limit.
Before he could quite finish, I got a call from one of the NGOs working for greater transparency through the RTI Act. “What the hell are they doing? They are killing the Act," the person on the other side said furiously, "How can they expect someone living in a remote corner of the country to adhere to the word limit while writing RTI application?”
He went on, “What does the government want? First, it makes such a law, and then wants to take the spirit out of it.”
I offered him my lawyer friend's argument. He interrupted, “Look, we can surely tell people to make the applications as short as possible. But to put a word limit and rejecting applications which exceed this word limit is completely unfair. You tell me. Should my application be rejected if it has 251 words in it?”
While both the lawyer and the NGO activist sounded reasonable in their arguments, the fact remains that every complainant in the country is not educated, let alone a lawyer used to drafting applications. It is this vast majority that needs to be empowered through the RTI Act. And it is this majority that will suffer on account of the draft rule mandating the 250-word limit.


.jpg)
Govt should acheive 100% literacy rate, then restrict the RTI application to 250 words.
90% students of English language cannot score more than 50% marks in writing summary. Though it is technically possible to make an effective RTI application in 250 words, but question is how many citizen possess this power of summarising? Why do babus want only very small percentage of population to seek information?
If we accept the arguments of Babus then why should there be lengthy arguments in front of Information Commissioners.
It is a desperate attempt to put the genie of actual independence back into the bottle.
The Govt especially the Babus are scared that the RTI applications are being used to bring out scams and they want to put a lid on that. First 250 words and then it will be slowly trimmed downwards, when finally it wont matter anymore
Post new comment