Dear Sarbajit Roy ji,
In fact, I was expecting such reaction from you when I was writing this. We have lodged strong protest against the proposed changes under the banner of Dwarka Forum (Regd) with 2500 on-line members. If you want, I can forward that to the group Some are unable to digest the name of Aruna Roy and others and they are more concerned to settle score with them than to serve the cause of public and protect the
Every member knows who is wasting their time. By the way, what is your stand about the proposed changes viz. word limit, one subject and abetment of case after the death or killing of applicant?
Members are not babies to be satisfied with lollypops and understand the scenario. I myself cannot ensure that my voice is heard but your or nobody else can snatch my right to raise my voice. Even you have not been able to ensure that your voice is heard therefore, writing frequently on Ms Aruna Roy and other prominent activists and lended your support to Shri S. D. Sharma, who wanted to know her religion (though he has more knowledge on the subject than other members) and thinks that he is rendering a great service to the cause of
Pl. inform your perception of "Good News" on this. I have just shared a news and never said that it is good but only titled it "A ray of hope on
Let the members decide that the information shared by me was worth sharing or not.
(Can not say your collegue as u have already declared that I m not yr co…..).
M. K. Gupta
Jt. Secy and media advisor to Dwarka Forum and a Free Lance Journalist.
From: Sarbajit Roy <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Sun, 27 February, 2011 9:44:25 AM
Subject: Re: [rti4empowerment] A RAY OF HOPE ON RTI EFFECTIVENESS
This is NOT good news. This is the pre-planned lollilops they had planned all along to keep the little babies who cry all the time quiet. Please do not waste time of group members publicising such non-events. Instead, please post a copy of the comments YOU had submitted to DoPT on Draft RTI Rules. What are YOU doing to ensure that your voice is heard ? Do YOU agree that only Aruna Roy can negotiate on behalf of citizens with DoPT?
A RAY OF HOPE ON RTI EFFECTIVENESS
(Extract from Times of India, 27.2.2011)
Sonias NAC prevails over govt on RTI, forest rights
Seeks Staggered Food Act Rollout
Subodh Ghildiyal & Himanshi Dhawan | TNN
New Delhi: The Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council (NAC) has won decisive victories in keeping at bay the governments attempt to regulate the Right to Information and ensuring that the pro-tribal Forest Rights Act (FRA) is made more effective for its intended beneficiaries.
It disagreed with the government and insisted that procuring 65 million tonnes of foodgrain for a full rollout of the programme was not a difficult task.The Council,seen as a policy interface with civil society,is an influential body providing policy and legislative inputs,headed as it is by the Congress president.
Prevailing on RTI and forest rights are major achievements while guaranteeing 35kg of foodgrain a month to families below the poverty line and sections of the urban poor is a key Sonia scheme,too.
The differences had fed into a perception of divergence between the Congress and the government.
On RTI, the government ceded ground on its bid to restrict an application to 250 words and a clause stating inquiry end on applicants death.
NAC forces govt to lift word limit on RTI applications
New Delhi: On RTI, the government ceded ground to Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council (NAC) in its bid to restrict an application to 250 words and a clause stating an inquiry would end if the applicant died.
Now,it will say an application should preferably not exceed 500 words.It has also agreed that a query will not cease on an applicants death.The government is still insisting that an RTI application should be focused on one subject.But NAC has decided not to give up.Sonia Gandhi told council members on Friday that this should be pursued with the government.
Department of Personnel and Training had earlier opposed NACs suggestions.Information activists who saw the proposed amendments as a bid to dilute the powerful act can rejoice after a protracted three-month battle.The 250-word cap and the single-subject rule are in particular seen to be limiting clauses.Abatement of an appeal in case of an applicants death has also seen activists arguing that this provision could be misused to kill people asking uncomfortable questions as has been reported in some cases recently.