The ideal of ‘Government by the people’ makes it
necessary that people have access to information on matters of
public concern. The free flow of information about affairs of
Government paves way for debate in public policy and fosters
accountability in Government. It creates a condition for ‘open
governance’ which is a foundation of democracy.
necessary that people have access to information on matters of
public concern. The free flow of information about affairs of
Government paves way for debate in public policy and fosters
accountability in Government. It creates a condition for ‘open
governance’ which is a foundation of democracy.
But neither the Fundamental Rights nor the Right to
Information have been provided in absolute terms. The
fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19 Clause 1(a)
are restricted under Article 19 clause 2 on the grounds of
national and societal interest. Similarly Section 8, clause 1 of
Right to Information Act, 2005, contains the exemption
provisions where right to information can be denied to public
in the name of national security and sovereignty, national
economic interests, relations with foreign states etc.
Thus, not all the information that the Government generates will or shall
be given out to the public. It is true that gone are the days of
closed doors policy making and they are not acceptable also
but it is equally true that there are some information which if
published or released publicly, they might actually cause more
harm than good to our national interest… if not domestically it
can make the national interests vulnerable internationally and
it is more so possible with the dividing line between national
and international boundaries getting blurred in this age of
rapid advancement of science and technology and global
economy.
be given out to the public. It is true that gone are the days of
closed doors policy making and they are not acceptable also
but it is equally true that there are some information which if
published or released publicly, they might actually cause more
harm than good to our national interest… if not domestically it
can make the national interests vulnerable internationally and
it is more so possible with the dividing line between national
and international boundaries getting blurred in this age of
rapid advancement of science and technology and global
economy.
It has to be understood that rights can be enjoyed
without any inhibition only when they are nurtured within
protective boundaries. Any excessive use of these rights which
may lead to tampering these boundaries will not further the
national interest. And when it comes to national economic
interest, disclosure of information about currency or exchange
rates, interest rates, taxes, the regulation or supervision of
banking, insurance and other financial institutions, proposals
for expenditure or borrowing and foreign investment could in
some cases harm the national economy, particularly if
released prematurely.
without any inhibition only when they are nurtured within
protective boundaries. Any excessive use of these rights which
may lead to tampering these boundaries will not further the
national interest. And when it comes to national economic
interest, disclosure of information about currency or exchange
rates, interest rates, taxes, the regulation or supervision of
banking, insurance and other financial institutions, proposals
for expenditure or borrowing and foreign investment could in
some cases harm the national economy, particularly if
released prematurely.
However, lower level economic and
financial information, like contracts and departmental budgets
should not be withheld under this exemption. This makes it
necessary to think when or at what stage an information is to
be provided i.e., the appropriate time of providing the
information which will depend on nature of information sought
for and the consequences it will lead to after coming in public
domain.
financial information, like contracts and departmental budgets
should not be withheld under this exemption. This makes it
necessary to think when or at what stage an information is to
be provided i.e., the appropriate time of providing the
information which will depend on nature of information sought
for and the consequences it will lead to after coming in public
domain.
Supreme Court in Mardia Chemicals Limited vs. Union of India, (2004) 4SCC 311, wherein this court while considering the validity ofSARFAESI Act and recovery of non-performing assets by
banks and financial institutions in India, held :
“………….it may be observed that though the transaction may have a character of a private contract yet the question of great importance behind such transactions as a whole having far reaching effect on the economy of the country cannot be ignored, purely restricting it to individual transactions more particularly when financing is through banks and financial institutions utilizing the money of the people in general namely, the depositors in the banks and public money at the disposal of the financial institutions.
Therefore, wherever public interest to such a large extent is involved and it may become necessary to achieve an object which serves the public purposes, individual rights may have to give way. Public interest has always been considered to be above the private interest. Interest of an individual may, to some extent, be affected but it cannot have the potential of taking over the public interest having an impact in the socio- economic drive of the country………..”
Under RTI Act, Supreme Court asks RBI, banks to come clean on information on defaulters-First Post
The Supreme Court today held that RBI should take rigid action against those banks and financial institutions which have been indulging in "disreputable business practices" and said it cannot withhold information on defaulters and other issues covered under the RTI Act.
"We have surmised that many financial institutions have resorted to such acts which are neither clean nor transparent. The RBI in association with them has been trying to cover up their acts from public scrutiny. It is the responsibility of the RBI to take rigid action against those banks which have been practicing disreputable business practices," a bench comprising Justices M Y Eqbal and C Nagappan said.
"RBI and the Banks have sidestepped the general public's demand to give the requisite information on the pretext of 'Fiduciary relationship' and 'Economic Interest'. This attitude of the RBI will only attract more suspicion and disbelief in them. RBI as a regulatory authority should work to make the Banks accountable to their actions.
The apex court said that RBI has a duty to uphold the interest of the public at large was duty bound to comply with the provisions of the RTI Act and disclose the information sought by the people.
"From the past we have also come across financial institutions which have tried to defraud the public. These acts are neither in the best interests of the country nor in the interests of citizens. To our surprise, RBI as a Watch Dog should have been more dedicated towards disclosing information to the general public under the Right to Information Act," the bench said.
"Economic interest of a nation in most common parlance are the goals which a nation wants to attain to fulfil its national objectives. It is the part of our national interest, meaning thereby national interest can't be seen with the spectacles(glasses) devoid of economic interest.
Slamming the RBI and other financial institutions for trying to cover up their acts from public scrutiny, the apex court said,"it had long since come to our attention that the Public Information Officers (PIOs) under the guise of one of the exceptions given under RTI Act, have evaded the general public from getting their hands on the rightful information that they are entitled to".
"Legislature's intent was to make available to the general public such information which had been obtained by the public authorities from the private body.
"Had it been the case where only information related to public authorities was to be provided, the Legislature would not have included the word 'private body'. As in this case, the RBI is liable to provide information regarding inspection report and other documents to the general public," the bench said.
"The ideal of 'Government by the people' makes it necessary that people have access to information on matters of public concern. The free flow of information about affairs of Government paves the way for debate in public policy and fosters accountability in Government. It creates a condition for 'open governance' which is a foundation of democracy," the court held.
RBI, commercial banks can’t hide names of defaulters under RTI, says Supreme Court -Economic Times
Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/50211924.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/50211924.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
No comments:
Post a Comment