RTIC seeks inclusion of high court in RTI law’s ambit

PESHAWAR: Considering the feedback from the media and civil society on the recent amendments to the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Right to Information Act 2013, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Right to Information Commission (RTIC) has sought certain changes including the inclusion of Peshawar High Court in the ambit of the RTI law.
In response to the letter of the Information Department, the RTIC wrote to the secretary information on August 5 that it had acknowledged the feedback from the civil society and rights bodies that noted with regret the exclusion of Provincial Assembly and its members from the definition of the “Public Bodies” and thus from the ambit of the RTI law.
It is probably in response to this reaction that the law is being considered for further amendments, it added.
The RTIC has sought that definition of the public body should be expanded to the high court on the pattern of the definition given in the Punjab Transparency Right to Information.
It added that under the recent amendments to the law, any Public Information Officer (PIO) who is punished for non-supply of information has been given the right to appeal to the district and sessions court. The RTIC proposed that this appeal should also go to the divisional bench of the high court.
It is to be mentioned here that about six amendments were swiftly passed by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly on June 23 to the RTI Act 2013. This was facilitated by a private member’s bill. It included seeking the exclusion of the Provincial Assembly from the ambit of the law as a public body.
Following severe criticism by the civil society and the media, the provincial government put the reversal of the amendment on the agenda of the assembly session when it will meet on September 7 to once again include the provincial assembly in the ambit of the RTI law.
The insertion of new clause (3) in Section 28 of the RTI Act was also made on the day. It turned the criminal offences under the law as bailable, non-cognizable and triable by the district and sessions court instead of High Court as is the case with other provinces where the RTI law is enacted.
It drew widespread criticism and led to an intensive correspondence among Provincial Information Department, RTIC and Law Department.
The Secretary Information on July 8, 2015 wrote to the RTIC that after feedback from the media on the amendments to the RTI law it would not go the full mile in strengthening the law and procedure. His letter also referred to the views expressed on the replacement of “court” in the act with the district and sessions court, not High Court, which may also undermine the decisions of the RTIC.
It also said that examples of other commissions are being given where appeals under the RTI law rest with the concerned high court.
Acknowledging the Information Department’s contention, the RTIC said in its July 24 letter that usually appeals are made by government servants to the Services Tribunal against any decision against a government servant. It said there are public bodies which may not come under the purview of the Services Tribunal and the high court is the proper forum for the appeals under the RTI law.
However, the Law Department in its July 28 letter to Information Department expressed disagreement to the view of considering high court as appellate authority, adding that proper forum for appeal against the decisions of the RTIC on the analogy of civil court is the district court of the district concerned. Nonetheless, it at the same time advised the administration department to prepare a bill by incorporating the requisite amendments. When contacted, provincial Information Minister Mushtaq Ghani said he had received the file seeking amendments to the RTI law and his ministry was actively considering it for taking it up in the coming assembly session. However, he said the amendment brought through the private member’s bill excluding the provincial assembly as public body would be reversed next week.