Right to Information and Judiciary

MY EXPERIENCES ON RTI & JUDICIARY by Subhash Chandra Agrawal Preamble of ‘Right-To-Information (RTI) Act’ suggests it an Act for being a tool to effectively check corruption in our democratic system which comprises of three wings namely judiciary, legislature and bureaucracy. If legislature and bureaucracy are subjected to RTI provisions, then why create unnecessary controversy on including non-judicial aspects of judicial administration under RTI Act? After all judges also come from the same human society which consists of both honest and dishonest persons. How Chief Justice of India, mentioned as Competent Authority, escape from being in purview of RTI Act when other concerned public-authorities respond to communications addressed to competent authorities like President of India and Chief Information Commissioner? Even Supreme Court registry itself responded to my very first RTI petition filed in Supreme Court just after RTI Act was introduced in October 2005, though in a vague manner, which related to my query on action taken on my complaint addressed to Chief Justice of India against a High Court judge. It is also to be observed that views of retired and present Chief Justices of India differ on the issue. Can implementation of an Act affecting consumers of justice be changed with change of guards? Does post of Chief Justice of India represent just an individual and not the institution? Leave aside aspect of Competent Authorities, any thin line if drawn between department-heads and others working under them, will then find an easy escape-route for ministers, secretaries and heads of all public-authorities from RTI provisions. Eminent jurists and legal luminaries have unanimous views on the issue. Speaker of Lok Sabha having passed RTI bill and its panel have echoed likewise. Any controversy on issue of Chief Justice of India being under purview of RTI Act is an afterthought at Supreme Court. Why judiciary is so much scare from being transparent by even having...