Right to Information (RTI)

The Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) founding Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was publicly disclosed by HNLU Raipur in 2012, three years before CLAT 2015 convenor RMLNLU Lucknow claimed exemption under Right to Information (RTI) for the same MoU.

The Supreme Court dismissed a Right to Information (RTI) appeal that had asked for judges’ medical expenses, citing judges’ right to privacy, reported the Indian Express.

The court was hearing advocate Prashant Bhushan for RTI activist Subhash C Aggarwal.

A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) HL Dattu said: “There should be some respect for privacy and if such information is disclosed, there will be no stopping. Today, someone is asking for information on medical expenses. Tomorrow, he will ask what are the medicines purchased by the judges. When there will be a list of medicines, he can make out what type of ailment the judge is suffering from. It starts like this. Where does this stop?”

Bhushan argued that this decision will set a bad precedent for other public servants who will use it to stonewall similar requests.

Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2015 convenor RMLNLU Lucknow claimed secrecy for the three CLAT memorandums of understanding (MoU) signed between national law universities (NLU) since 2007.

The Bar Council of India (BCI) has complied with Legally India’s 20 October 2014 right to information (RTI) request on 20 April 2015, supplying around 1,600 pages of documents.

The Delhi high court yesterday stayed until April 27 a decision of its single judge to bring the Attorney General of India’s (AGI) office under the RTI Act.

The Times of India reported that “a bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice R S Endlaw said that the single judge’s findings “require consideration” and it will hear the appeal filed by the Centre against the ruling” that the AG is not a public authority.

The Bar Council of India (BCI) has allowed Legally India’s Right to Information (RTI) appealagainst the regulator, having in December backtracked on its earlier position to provide information.

Last year the Bar Council of India (BCI) rejected a lawyer’s right to information (RTI) request and appeal on the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) by simply not answering the majority of queries.

The Bar Council of India (BCI) requires lawyers who take the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to waive their statutory and fundamental rights.

This is a short story and video of how LI tried and failed getting the BCI chairman to be more transparent.

Karnataka advocate @certiorary argues that a recent Madras high court judgment is the latest erosion of transparency in the judiciary, despite the RTI Act, and needs to be fixed at a higher level.

All central ministries and departments will mandatorily upload on their website their replies to Right to Information (RTI) requests from 31 October, to comply with yesterday’s directive issued by the Department of Personnel and Training (DPT), reported the Economic Times and others.

Currently the government replies to individual RTI applicants by post, either providing them the requested information in paper or in electronic form, or asking the applicant to inspect relevant documents at the government department’s premises, or rejecting the request.

Applicants often publish their RTI replies anonymously through various media channels, after redacting their own particulars. When the DPT’s directive is implemented, the particulars of the applicants may also be disclosed transparently on the ministry or departments’ websites.

RTI activists have often faced threats and reprisals.

@bhanupriyarao: Here is the circular http://t.co/0eca5k6ENt Worth writing to DoPT + NIC contacts given there

Last year the UPA government launched an online portal to file RTIs with 82 ministries and departments.

Supreme Court advocate Vineet Dhanda, who was booked in March for an alleged altercation with the police, has hit back at the cops by reportedly exonerating himself with CCTV and video footage of his interaction with the police that he obtained via a right to information (RTI) request for the police’s internal inquiry files into the case. The video evidence apparently directly contradicts the police’s charges against the advocate.

Dhanda now told the DNA that he would sue the cops for defamation after filing false cases against him and roughing up him and his wife.

In the fourth and fifth All India Bar Exams (AIBE), 80 per cent and 73 per cent respectively passed the exam out of a total of 58,631 applicants.

A Right to Information request to the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) revealed that 117 Indian prisoners are languishing in foreign jails even after completion of their prison sentence.