The Indian parliament enacted the Freedom of Information Act in 2002 which was repealed to formulate the Right to Information Act on October 12th 2005.[1] The act was brought about to create transparency and reduce corruption by empowering petitioners with information relating to the work of public authority. But has it been effective? Does the petitioner get the required information from the concerned government body?

We at Transparent Chennai and CDF have filed several RTIs seeking information relating to public finance, environment and stocks of infrastructure to the respective government departments but have seldom received satisfactory answers.

Under the Act chapter 2- section7 (3), the reply to the petitioner should be sent within 30 days from the day the public authority receives the RTI. But on most occasions it has failed to reach the petitioner within the stipulated time keeping him/her guessing.

This blog is a firsthand insight of how effective the RTI has been at procuring public interest information from various government agencies and what happens behind the scene.

Response from the government officials for the RTI:

Most officials respond courteously, asking us about our background and the necessity of the information that we sought, and after we brief them about our initiative in the areas of research they co-operate. In some cases we are treated rudely, as the officials take offence on being obligated to reply with the information that the department might not possess, although by virtue of its work it should possess. We learnt that the RTI pressurises these already overburdened government officials. The reply requires them to co-ordinate with various subordinate departments for the information, editing if necessary and then mailing it to the petitioner apart from doing their regular chores of work.

Most of them felt that the government loses money, as a reply to an RTI costs the government the time of the officials and the department, and the costs of printing and extracting the necessary data and mailing the petitioner together costs more than the 10 rupees which the petitioner has to pay to seek this information, although under chapter 2 section 7 (3) the officials are liable to charge the petitioner the cost of gathering this information. They prefer that the petitioner comes directly to them and requests for the data before an RTI is filed. This ensures that they will not be under the immense pressure that an RTI creates and that they willingly disseminate the information.

What can be asked under the act? :

Under the Act chapter 1- section 2(f) the word ‘information’ means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force.

As per the decision given by CIC vide para 5 of file No CIC/AT/A/2006/00045 dated 21.04.06, the RTI Act does not cast any obligation on the public authority to answer any queries in which the petitioner attempts to elicit answers to his questions with prefixes such as why, what, when and whether.

Under Chapter2 section4 (2,3)  the departments are to disseminate public information regularly on the website and through other means of communication, so that the public’s need to use this act is lessened. Despite this, every government department from the corporation/ development authorities to para-statal bodies, the central and state departments, Nodal Agencies and committees receive hundreds of petitions every year.

So we started off by asking: What sort of questions do petitioners ask? What sort of information is the government liable to disseminate? How does this information empower people in understanding the working of the government? What sort of information is relevant for the public’s knowledge? Why does it not disclose all the information related to the department’s working on the concerned website?

To understand this, we probed the officials about the RTIs and types of queries that they receive every month, the information that they seek and the process to collect and disseminate this information.

Apparently, the Corporation of Chennai forwards all the RTIs to the concerned zonal offices which reply individually after collecting the required information from the division or ward offices. We spoke to the executive engineers of 5 zones and all of them said that 80-90% of the RTIs they receive are grievances concerning neighbouring buildings that flout bye-laws, land disputes, properties affected due to road widening, employees seeking details about their promotions etc. There are minimal petitions about public interest. The subordinates murmured about the RTI becoming a money making business for some as many of the land related and bye law flouting related RTIs were regularly being filed by a few individuals.

Lack of Co-ordination within departments and authenticity of data:

Each public authority has a number of departments and moving the government machinery for seeking information in a particular infrastructure is a herculean task as the departments do not co-ordinate well with each other.

For example in my previous blog ‘Road Safety: Who is responsible for it?’ I had mentioned that the Traffic Police implements and enforces regulation; the accident data are recorded by the traffic police and within the department there is a separate wing that records and updates this data at the end of each day. In our RTI we asked questions regarding the following:

  • The number of people affected age and sex wise.
  • The number of people affected by using a particular mode of commute.

Both the data ideally should be the same but it differs drastically. This could possibly be because of an error in reporting it correctly or feeding it into the computer.

A similar situation happened with the public toilet data. As the corporation did not have a central data bank, we went to individual zones and collected the number of public toilets in each zone which was 512 in total. Subsequently we filed an RTI for the same and the reply was 715 in total. Which one should be considered? We assume that the one obtained from the RTI is the authentic figure.

Although the officials are burdened with RTIs, it has been effective in checking corruption. It deters politicians and bureaucrats and that is probably why RTI activists like Amit Jethwa are killed for opening the Pandora box through this power of information. RTI is our right, use it to benefit the society at large and to create transparency in the system.

Roshan Toshniwal, with inputs from D. Raja.

[1] http://rti.gov.in/

Every election, we vote.

Actually those of us who are above 18, have an election ID, have our names on the voter’s list and think it is our right and duty- that bunch of people vote.

We stand in line to elect a person who will represent us. When we elect this representative- what do we expect of them? What is our criterion for evaluating their performance? To have a criterion for evaluation, we need to know what their duties, responsibilities, functions are.

Here is what the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 says-

The local government in Chennai is the Municipal Corporation of Chennai. The Municipal Corporation constitutes of[1] –

Council

Mayor

Ward Committees

Standing Committees

Commissioner

Council

Chennai city is divided into 155 wards[2]. The wards are further grouped into 30 units[3]. Each Unit has a Unit Officer. The wards are also grouped under 10 zones.

Each ward has an elected representative called the Ward Councillor. These Councillors form the Council at the Municipal Corporation. The Members of Parliament and the Members of the State Legislative Assembly of those constituencies that lie within the Chennai Corporation Area are also members of this Council but they do not have voting rights[4].

Meetings – The Council should meet in the municipal office once every month on the date and time arranged by the Mayor. There need to be atleast 50 members in attendance for any business to be transacted. The minutes of the proceedings of the Council are entered in the minutes book which is signed by the Mayor. The minutes book is kept in the municipal office and can be inspected by any Councillor.

All the meetings of the Council are open to the public[5].

Functions- The Council has to go through the periodical receipts, disbursements

from the Municipal fund, progress reports and pass the necessary resolutions. The Council cannot perform any of the functions assigned to the Commissioner or the Standing Committees. However, any resolution or order passed by the Council has to be followed by the Standing Committees and the Commissioner unless it is cancelled by the State Government. If a resolution or order passed by the Council counters a provision in any Act, by-law, rule or notification or is unjust, then the Commissioner may refer the matter to the State Government.[6]

The Council or any Standing Committee can ask the Commissioner to furnish any record or document under his control, accounts and plans of the administration and reports on any subject connected to the municipal administration. [7]

The Council can make by-laws on various matters such as taxes, public works like lighting, drainage, sanitation. Every by-law has to be sanctioned by the State Government.[8]

The Council can form a Joint Committee with any local authority for any purpose that is of common interest.[9]

Functions of Individual Councillors – A Councillor can bring to notice of the proper authority the neglect of municipal work, wastage of municipal property, communicate the needs of his ward and suggest improvements. A Councillor has access to the records of the Corporation and can peruse them giving due notice to the Commissioner. The Commissioner can forbid a Councillor’s access to records. In such a case, the Councillor can appeal to the Mayor who will take the final decision[10].

Mayor

The Mayor is elected during the corporation elections and is not the Councillor of any Ward. The Mayor is an ex-officio member of the Council and enjoys the same rights and privileges as the Councillors. The Deputy Mayor is elected from among the Councillors. Both the Mayor and the Deputy-Mayor are ineligible for re-election at the end of their term[11].

The Mayor, the Deputy Mayor and the Councillors are not given any salary or remuneration out of the Corporation funds[12]


Ward Committees

According to the 74th Amendment, for large urban areas there need to be three

tiers – the Ward Committee, The Zone Committee and the Corporation[13]. In Chennai, the Ward Committee is the Zone Committee. The Ward Councillors of every Zone form the Ward Committee.  Members of the Ward Committee elect a Chairman from among themselves[14]. It is in the hands of the Council to devolve responsibilities and duties to the Ward Committees[15].

Standing Committees

As directed in the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 there are six Standing Committees – Accounts, Education, Public Health, Town Planning, Works, Taxation & Finance. The members of the Council elect 15 members for each Standing Committee. Every Standing committee is to conduct a meeting atleast once a month. Atleast 3 members need to be present for any business to be transacted. The minutes of the proceedings are entered in a book and signed by the Chairman. The Council can ask for and inspect the minutes book any time. [16]

Commissioner

The Commissioner is appointed by the State Government. Other officers are also

appointed by the State Government to assist the Commissioner. The Commissioner performs only those functions that are authorized by the Council and the State Government. The ‘methods of recruitment, conditions of service, pay and allowances and discipline and conduct of the commissioner’ is controlled by the State Government. The Commissioner has the custody of all the records of the Corporation. The office of the Commissioner is vested with the executive power of carrying out the provisions of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act,1919. The salary and allowances of the Commissioner are paid by the State Government out of the Municipal Funds[17].

The Commissioner can attend the meeting of the Council and the meetings of the

various Committees but cannot move any resolution or vote.[18]

The Act is very specific about the role and responsibilities of members of various Committees, the Commissioner and the bureaucracy led by him. But interestingly, for our representative, the individual Councillors, there aren’t concrete responsibilities laid out. So what do they do? More on that later.

[1] Corporation of Chennai. Constitution of Council. , Web. <http://www.chennaicorporation.gov.in/council/index.htm>.

[2] Corporation of Chennai. Constitution of Council. , Web. <http://www.chennaicorporation.gov.in/council/index.htm>.

[3] Government of Tamil Nadu. Citizen’s Charter. Corporation of Chennai, General Department, General Statistics , Web. <http://www.tn.gov.in/citizen/corpchn.html>.

[4] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.” Chapter II,Constitution of the Council.

[5] Corporation of Chennai, “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.”, Schedule II, Rules regarding proceeding of the  Council and Committees.

[6] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.” Chapter II, 23.Functions of council.

[7] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.” Chapter II, 26. Requisition by council or a committee for commissioner’s

records.

[8] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.” Chapter XIV, 349.Powers of council to make by-laws.

[9] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.” Chapter II, 27-A.Appointment of Joint Committee.

[10] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.” Chapter II, 25.Duties and powers of individual councilor.

[11] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.” Chapter II, Section 28-30.

[12] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.” Chapter II, 25-A.Mayor,DeputyMayor or councilor not to receive remuneration.

[13] Hamid, Areeba. “74th Amendment: An Overview.”Centre for Civil Society (2004). <http://www.ccsindia.org/ccsindia/interns2004/2.%2074th%20Amendment_Areeba.pdf>

[14] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.” Chapter II,6-G, Election and term of office of chairman of wards committee.

[15] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.” Chapter II, 6-H,Powers and functions of wards committee.

[16] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.”Schedule II, Section 14-20.

[17] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.” Chapter II, Section 7-10.

[18] Corporation of Chennai. “The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.” Chapter II, 33.Commissioner when to attend meetings.

Meryl Mary Sebastian

As an American, I often take for granted the fact that data collection is ubiquitous. Sometimes I even wonder if there is too much data—as though my every move in life is being watched by some Big Brother, some omnipresent planner, who knows me better than I know myself.

Chennai is my first experience in India and interning for Transparent Chennai is my first headlong encounter with the problems of not enough data. In my three weeks here, I have determined five categories of government data that sometimes overlap:

1) data that is not collected;
2) data that is poorly collected;
3) data that is mismanaged or misreported;
4) data that is not made publicly available;
5) data that is well collected.

In an effort to better understand Chennai Corporation’s expansion into the other part of the Chennai Metropolitan Area, I visited the Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (CMWSSB), otherwise known as Metrowater, the parastatal agency for water supply and sewerage services. I was curious to find out how and to what extent MetroWater is servicing other urban local bodies (ULBs).

Armed with a letter explaining my credentials and scope of research, I was shuffled through five different offices where I repeatedly explained my raison d’etre in the most humbling, deferential way possible. I had an organization chart, but the way I was moved from person to person makes me wonder—how would anyone know how to navigate this web of bureaucracy? And would citizens be given the same time of day as me? My research companion was convinced that they were only speaking to me because I was from X University in the United States.

I would ask questions and get wholly unrelated answers. Each person began with a similar scripted introduction to the generalities of MetroWater. When I asked for specifics, they were never given. It was as if I never asked the question.

Finally, a document appeared. I was not allowed to handle it but it seemed to have the title, “Planned MetroWater Services in Expanded City Limit”. I asked for a copy. I asked for the man’s name. He wouldn’t give it to me—what would happen if I misquoted him somewhere? Finally, I received several Xeroxed sheets from the document after promising not to alter or reproduce anything. I lied.

Now I have some data. But what kind of data it really is, I wonder. Does creating data from bad data make better data?

– Renee Ho is a graduate student from Princeton University

The Government of India launched the National Urban Sanitation Policy in 2008 to achieve 100 per cent sanitation coverage in Indian cities, through methods that encourage community participation. In this regard, the Ministry of Urban Development also allotted Rs. 13 crore to support cities to prepare their City Sanitation Plans (CSPs). A district level study was undertaken to rate the level of sanitization on 19 broad parameters called the “urban sanitation indicators”. These Service Level Benchmarks reveal that none of the cities in India, including Chennai, are close to achieving complete sanitization. Chennai, in fact, has been rated as a city that needs considerable improvement in its sanitary conditions. Yet we see very little effort and money committed towards sanitation.

While many states have already undertaken the process of writing their CSPs, the state government of Tamil Nadu has been completely irresponsive on this front. None of the cities in Tamil Nadu have been granted any funds to initiate the writing of CSPs for their city. Sources say that the Tamil Nadu government hasn’t been proactive in taking this up. For instance, Chennai which has only 715 public toilets serving a population of approximately 5 million, has done very little to improve access to this very basic public amenity. The informal sector in Chennai, which accounts for 70 per cent of the jobs, goods and services utilized by all, largely depends on the amenities provided by the city for its sanitation needs. 1 million people live in Chennai’s slums and over 1200 declared slums accommodate approximately 23 per cent of the city’s population. They lack all access to adequate shelter and services. Open defecation is still a common practice and women and children feel safer defecating in open fields close to their workplaces or homes rather than having to walk long distances to urinate in dimly lit city toilets. Considering the current status of sanitation, why are sanitation investments so less and programs not pro-poor? Why do sound policies and programs fail to take off in certain regions and states while they do wonderfully well in others?

A recent World Bank study – “The Political Economy of Sanitation: How can we increase investment and improve service for the poor?” discusses operational experiences from case studies from four different countries including India. It shows that the current limited focus on sanitation is driven largely by political motivation in the context of competing demands for resources, and to a lesser extent by technical or economic considerations.

“The case study looks at the political drivers for the success of the Total Sanitation Campaign in rural Maharashtra. Designed as a supply-driven sanitation program, the campaign has a set of defined components that include information, education and communication, community mobilization activities, construction of household toilets and community complexes, and provision of toilets in government schools and anganwadis. The India case study examines why the Total Sanitation Campaign failed to take off in most the states until 2004–05 and provides political economy insights on the Maharashtra success story”

To download the report, click here.

—————–

Somya Sethuraman

Transparent Chennai’s toilets layer got some publicity after the official launch of the site on Monday. The most detailed article, which ran in the Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Only-600-public-toilets-in-city/articleshow/6686444.cms), captured the nuances of our findings well, but was slightly off on one of our numbers. I want to take this opportunity to talk about our toilets layer in more detail here.

Our team became very interested in access to sanitation for the poor last year, and we began to ask questions about the number of public toilets in the city. When we approached the Chennai Corporation for information about the total number of public toilets and their locations, they told us to go to the zonal offices because they did not have the information. So, one of our team members visited each of the city’s ten zonal offices, and asked whether they could provide her a list of the toilets in their zone. Zonal staff were, for the most, bemused by our interest, and provided the information voluntarily. But before we put the data up on the site, we decided to file an RtI application for the same information, just to confirm our numbers. We were really surprised to find that the numbers were all completely different. Here’s a table with the numbers that we first received from the Zonal offices and what the RtI data turned up.

Zone Initial Data RtI Data
1 31 49
2 72 51
3 82 133
4 20 49
5 60 69
6 41 61
7 35 77
8 72 74
9 60 58
10 99 94
Total 572 715

The numbers are not radically different, but these discrepancies still bring up important questions about the management of toilets in the city. If the Chennai Corporation does not have a central register of toilets, how do they know where more toilets are needed? How is “access” to sanitation across the city even calculated when the city government does not have a central register of the number and location of public toilets? How much money is allocated for improving access to sanitation in the city, and how are strategies to improve sanitation decided upon?

We hope to be exploring these questions in more detail in our research over the next couple of months, and plan to hold a meeting on public toilets and access to sanitation, particularly for women in the city, in November. Check back for details of this meeting if you’re interested in this topic, or contact us to help us in mapping and surveying toilets in the city!

- Nithya V Raman