Aruna Roy is an Indian political and social activist, who founded and heads the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathana. She is best known as a prominent leader of the Right to Information movement, which led to the enactment of the Right to Information Act in 2005. She is also a member of the Sonia Ganhdi-led National Advisory Council. She received the Ramon Magsaysay Award for Community Leadership. In 2010, she received the prestigious Lal Bahadur Shastri National Award for Excellence in Public Administration, Academia and Management.
Excerpts from an interview:
You championed the Right to Information Act. What’s next on your agenda?
The passing of the RTI was only the beginning. A law becomes a reality and helps people only when it becomes a natural part of government action. If we look back at the last six years, we have a good law and poor implementation on some provisions of the Act. Those issues need to be focused and we need to force implementation. Section 4 for mandatory disclosure needs to be put in place, the transparency of policies and laws that affect us all need to be put into a transparent pre-legislative process have to be formulated, commissions must be critiqued and helped with genuine suggestions and support.
The exciting thing is that lakhs use the law and own it. There are innumerable problems with the implementation of the law. We need to build stronger support structures to extend the use of the RTI in more innovative ways. For instance, it is the need of the hour to use the RTI as a tool to demand transparency in the way policies are formulated, decisions are taken etc. It is imperative that there be accountability of the government, to itself and to citizens, on legislative processes that today are being undertaken in an environment of secrecy and exclusivity. In this regard, the National Campaign for Peoples’ Right to Information (NCPRI) has been asking for a transparent pre legislative process derived from the mandate of the RTI section 4, sub section 4 (1) (b) (vii) and 4 (1) (c).
There has been a spate of attacks on RTI activists. A number of people have been killed. How do you see this trend and what can be done about it?
The murder of RTI activists across the country is is shocking. Most of the questions asked by RTI activists have pertained to corruption and/ or the arbitrary use of power. The intimidation has come from vested interests. Even so, this has not set back the process as the successful use of the RTI has only further determined the aam aadmi to use it more extensively. This is indicative of the growing faith people have in the RTI to unearth corruption and question improper use of power. It is imperative that urgent action be taken to send a clear signal that any assault on an individual’s right to know and right to question, will not be tolerated. It is in this context that there are growing demands for a strong and comprehensive Whistleblowers Protection Bill, that takes cognizance of the growing threat that RTI users are living under. The Whistleblowers Protection Bill must clearly identify the role of RTI users in blowing the whistle in multiple sectors and arenas, and accord the necessary protection to them.
Anna Hazare feels that the RTI is only the first step towards weeding out corruption. And Lokpal is the next one since RTI does not have any punitive powers. What’s your take on this?
The RTI has underlined the need for transparency, and within that fix accountability for denial of information. But once information discloses serious problems, either of corruption or arbitrary use of power, that information becomes the basis for the next struggle. It is necessary but not sufficient. The Lokpal will look at issues that arise from corruption but arbitrariness and misconduct will fall outside its purview. Even the Lokpal, to deliver, needs to be divided into four sets of concerns as the NCPRI has defined in its Approach, presented on July 6, 2011. It was agreed that the best way of tackling corruption and redressing grievances at all levels would be through a basket of measures involving a multiplicity of institutions and measures, rather than expecting one institution to do everything for everyone. The NCPRI has prepared draft concept notes (available on www.righttoinformation.info) on CVC reforms; a grievance redressal mechanism; and suggestions for a strong Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, a Whistleblower Protection Bill and a Lokpal Anti Corruption Law that need simultaneous strengthening in order to curtail corruption and mal-governance at all levels.
You are a staunch opponent of Special Economic Zones (SEZs). But is it not a fact that SEZ have been responsible for tremendous economic development of the country?
The Special Economic Zone Act stands out as an example of how laws are passed in the country disregarding democratic processes of detailed parliamentary debate and reference to the standing committee. The SEZ Act was placed in Parliament and passed in two days. The SEZ Act was unknown to the people who have a right to know what governance was doing in its name in parliament. It was clearly backed by corporate interests, which have successfully muted the strength of the weak. Acquisition of land has marginalized the poor through the use of force and coercion.
You have always been agitating for Land Reform Policy. How much have you achieved in your struggle. What is the stand of the central government regarding the land reform policies and what are the bottle necks?
The NAC is in the process of finalizing its recommendations on the land policy. You can refer to the NAC website for its press release on the agreed recommendations on the policy of land acquisition by the NAC.
Naxalism is on the rise in our country. What do you think are the causes of the increase in Naxalite activities and how can they be curbed?
That is a very serious question and would take several pages to answer fully. Suffice it to say, that the rise of this violent protest is a reaction to centuries of exploitation and systematic and planned violence of the administrative machinery. The dismal track record of delivery of any kind of service and now to top it all, dispossession of land and livelihood by industry and the new development paradigm has elicited this reaction. Only wise and compassionate governance can deal effectively with this problem on a long term basis. In the immediate sense, we should not draw lines and organize State violence against the hapless people caught between two kinds of violence. It is a very difficult situation and must be handled with care and political solutions must be sought.
You resigned from the post of IAS and took up social service. Don’t you think you could have served the people better by being in the government job and using its machinery for the benefit of the people?
No bureaucracy is mandated for change. The civil service maintains the status quo. To bring about a change, or sometimes even a reversal, in the practice of governance in a country, the change needs to come from outside the system. I saw more space for my kind of action outside the system. I learnt from my short stay in the IAS about management a la government. There is a need for dynamism both inside and outside the government system. We need honest and committed people working in the government.
In 2000, you were honoured with the prestigious Ramon Magsaysay Award, regarded as Asia’s Nobel Prize, for “empowering Indian villagers to claim what is rightfully theirs by upholding and exercising the people’s right to information.” How much things have changed for the Indian villagers since then?
It is a supreme irony that for the people I work with, the Ramon Magsaysay Award, means nothing. But consequent to the award the collective bargaining power of the issues improved. The collective outside the area of the MKSS of which we are a part, struggled for and got the MGNREGA passed. The change that occurs happens because of many interventions. The MKSS is only one of the many.
What are the main contributions of your organization Mazdoor Kisaan Shakti Sangathan( MKSS)?
The MKSS has been an initiator of the demand of the Right to Information. Through its demonstrations, numerous campaigns and yatras beginning in 1991, the MKSS built the principles of a demand for the RTI on the basis of the experiences of the rural poor. It unpacked the notions of transparency and accountability, on the basis of the reality of those who were the first victims of mal governance. The MKSS firmly believes in the power of the collective in a democracy- and there lay the foundation principles of the Public Hearing or Jan Sunwai, and shaped the idea of institutionalized structures like social audits. Social audits are a process of collective and immediate monitoring of corruption and misgovernance. This tool born out of the disclosure of information has become a powerful means of tackling corruption and demanding accountability of public functionaries. Our experience with social audits was a lesson to us all about the power of disclosure of information to tackle corruption and demand accountability amongst public functionaries.
You have always campaigned for RTI. But there are also other human rights issues. Do you have any plans to take them up as well?
As a social and political activist, I am a member of the National Campaign for Peoples’ Right to Information (NCPRI-created in 1996), a platform of individuals and organizations committed to transparency and accountability, the campaign that pioneered the drafting, and the enactment of the Right to Information Act; the National Alliance of Peoples Movements (NAPM), an alliance of progressive people’s organizations and movements, and the Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), an organization free from political ideologies which is a platform for the defense of civil liberties, and many other such similar campaigns.
Are you fully satisfied by the RTI Act in its present form or do you think some more things needs to be done to make it effective.
Like all laws which go through a process of democratic decision making, the RTI Act, though one of the best in the world, will always leave some spaces for improvement. But since it offers a legislative framework for the norms and guidelines that must be adhered to for disclosure of all information held by the Government related to the general public, for the first time, it has brought in a culture of accountability by the simple fact of having to answer questions and penalty in case it is den with malafide. In comparison to the freedom of information laws passed in various countries of the world, the RTI legislation in India stands out as one of the most comprehensive, wide and strong.
Section 4 of the RTI Act, which pertains to the pro-active disclosure of information by all public authorities, offers us one of the best possible ways to do so. Efforts must be made to use this provision of the Act as widely as possible and devising minimum, clear and practical norms of transparency that all public offices must be subjected to.
Section 4 of the RTI Act also provides the legal principle and support for a transparent pre legislative process that can ensure that details about the intent and concept- from the time a policy is conceptualized till the time it is tabled in Parliament as a draft Bill- be in the public domain to facilitate peoples’ participation in the law making process.
There are still issues, there is no penalty for non compliance of this provision, and has therefore been neglected by the system.
How do you see the ongoing tussle between the anti-corruption leader Anna Hazare and the government over Lokpal Bill?
India is a democratic country, and there is a space for people to offer their differences in opinion and perspective in a civil and reasoned fashion. If two parties differ on a position, on the details of legislation it must feed into a wider public debate. Discussion and differences in opinion are a part of policy formulation. However it is important to ensure that public debates are not reduced to personality clashes, because this would greatly dilute the potential of a democratic debate.
