Ministry makes mockery of RTI law

It is not for the first time

ISLAMABAD: Nazir Ahmad was a member of Appellant Tribunal Inland Revenue (ATIR) when he faced allegations of misusing authority that resulted in the revenue loss running into billions of rupees. An inquiry is pending against him with the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) that was started after the Transparency International Pakistan brought the issue to the bureau’s attention.

Instead of waiting for the complaint to conclude, the Law Ministry notified his appointment as chairman of ATIR on June 20 this year. If the notifications are any guide, approval of the competent authority, Prime Minister of Pakistan, was sought later on August 4.

Waheed Shahzad, Advocate, filed an application under Freedom of Information Ordinance 2002 to inquire whether the PM was apprised of the pending inquiry against Nazir Ahmed and the requisite qualification he lacked for holding this position.

The Law Ministry replied that it “had been declared as classified/secret. Thus the request made through the above letter cannot be acceded to.”Although, the Federal Ombudsman dismissed last year this claimed status of the ministry “as classified/secret” body, nevertheless, it continues to refuse information on this ground.

The ministry grounded its argument on a list furnished in 1996 that declared it among the classified divisions.When Zahid Abdullah of the Coalition of Right to Information moved the FO against the Law Ministry for denying the information about the funds spent on print media advertisements, the FO rejected the plea of the ministry being a classified department.

The Section 2(h) of the Freedom of Information Ordinance 2002 has declared all ministries, divisions and attached departments of the federal government as ‘public body’, the FO pointed out and the Law Ministry falls in this category.

As the FOI Ordinance 2002 is the latest law, it overrides the rules framed in 1996, the verdict further noted.Nevertheless, the ministry refused to honour the FO’s ruling in the case under question and has continued to claim its status of a classified department. Denial of details about the appointment of chairman ATIR is the latest example.

Waheed Shahzad’s questions were as simple as straight which shouldn’t have been refused, provided there was no violation of the merit in the appointment of Nazir Ahmed, the new chairman of ATIR.

Whether investigation/inquiry/complaint against Nazir Ahmed was disposed of before his appointment was his first question. The follow-up query sought the copy of the report regarding this inquiry if shared with the PM to apprise him of the background of Nazir Ahmad. He also wondered whether any selection committee was involved in this appointment procedure and demanded documentary details in this regard. A couple of questions were about his lack of experience required for this position.

None of them was answered leaving no option for the applicant but to move the Lahore High Court invoking Article 19-A of the Constitution that is about the citizens’ right to information. The ministry has been put on notice by the court.

Although, no government department is forthcoming in providing information requested under the FOI Ordinance 2002, the irony is unmistakable in the case of Law Ministry that has been misinterpreting the laws and refusing the FO rulings against it.

This correspondent sent a list of five questions in August last year asking about the number of fact-finding commissions set up from 2008 to 2015; their names and purposes; the amount of money spent on the working of each commission; the implementation status of their recommendations; and copies of the commissions’ reports. The Law Ministry refused information, arguing that making that public will create “unnecessary problems, embarrassing situation and open a Pandora’s box for the government.”

As the Federal Ombudsman was dismissive of the ministry’s argument and directed it to release details while hearing a complaint of The News, the verdict was challenged before the President of Pakistan whose decision is still awaited. An information request demanding the list of lawyers hired by the government for cases inside Pakistan and abroad along with the fee paid to them was also refused.

Information Minister Pervaiz Rashid, who recently admitted that he himself didn’t have access to the information, had also tried helping this correspondent in obtaining details of lawyers but failed.