Given the advantages that technology can provide, much more effort is needed to co-opt technology into our governance. Although there is ample opportunity to do this, somehow, there is reluctance on the part of our State bureaucracy to go for this technology makeover. The reasons are not too hard to find. The government sector continues to resist change and would prefer to function on the old system of secrecy, red tape and exclusivity. The public on the other hand clamors for transparency and accountability. Recently, the Parliamentary Secretary for Rural Development (RD) openly criticized what he termed as ‘outside interference’ in the RD Department and pointing out that the public should give more credit to the department for its performance instead of always trying to find fault. Indeed credit should be given where it is due. The authorities however should not expect only praise when actually there could be several public grievances. So to expect only credit when actually there is none is also wrong. Similarly if there is unnecessary harassment from the public though the department may be performing, this is also wrong. And although not very specific on what this ‘outside interference’ was all about, the Parliamentary Secretary said that this had become very common and that officers are spending most of their time attending to Right to Information (RTI) applications and other financial matters regarding MGNREGA. Perhaps the concern department ought to clarify what this ‘outside interference’ means. If there is harassment meted out to honest officials because they are working hard then this needs to be condemned and stopped. If however the public have some genuine grievances, then the department must be ready to listen and address these problems.
All of us know by now that the RTI Act makes it mandatory for government offices to disclose information sought by the public. The aim is to promote an honest and open government. If a member of the public has any doubt and wants information related to government programmes, then this is a right and should not be seen as ‘outside interference’. Our government should govern and perform well the task set before it then perhaps the public will not have to bother about questioning its functioning. We need more people to raise question and probe the working of the government system. And if RTI is being used to make the system respond and work for the benefit of people, then there should be no complaint about it. The government should not see it as ‘outside interference’ but rather RTI application/s should be seen as contributing to good governance and public participation. And so rather than resist the change brought about by recent laws and technologies, our government (departments) must adapt and reform. Perhaps to begin with, the plethora of our departments should go for a complete makeover as far as their respective websites are concerned. In fact if our departments want to be free of ‘outside interference’, then they should embrace transparency in all aspects of their working. If this comes about, naturally RTI application or complaint will become redundant. And the RTI Act in Section 4(2) mentions about ‘voluntary disclosure of information’ by public authorities. This way, the public have minimum resort to the use of the RTI Act to obtain information. So besides voluntary disclosure of all relevant information the best way to stop ‘outside interference’ is for the government to perform, be transparent and accountable.
