New Delhi:
This is one move that the government will find little opposition to. It is considering an ordinance to supercede this month's order of the Central Information Commission bringing political parties under the Right to Information or RTI Act.
It is looking at changing the definition of "public authority" in the Act in a way that will exempt political parties. The ordinance, if brought, will be given effect retrospectively from before the date of the CIC's ruling.
The law ministry has sent a draft of the proposed ordinance to the department for personnel and training.
All political parties have argued that they are not government funded and are not public authorities and so should not be brought under the RTI Act, which seeks to make transparent all expenditure of public money and other details about public authorities that impact citizens. On record though, the parties say they are open to such scrutiny.
The CIC had ruled on June 3 that any written records can now be sought from any entity in a political party. This means that they would now have to share, if sought, details like who funds them, how they spend that money and even how they select candidates for elections.
The CIC held that political parties are "public authorities", have a "public character" and are "substantially funded by the government." It said that parties got land and big government-owned bungalows at deep discounts which amounts to getting "financial benefits." As does income tax exemptions granted to parties and free air time on All India Radio and Doordarshan at the time of elections, it held.
It also said that political parties "affect the lives of the citizens, directly or indirectly in every conceivable way and are continuously engaged in performing public duty. It is, therefore, important that they become accountable to public."
The CIC was ruling on a clutch of petitions filed by senior advocate and activist Prashant Bhushan and RTI activist Subhash Aggarwal among others.
Asked for his reaction, Mr Bhushan said, "The CIC ruling seems to have annoyed all parties, particularly the Congress. I will not be surprised if the ordinance is passed with the support of all parties. None of them believe in transparency. This ordinance will be challenged in court as unconstitutional."