PEOPLES ’ MONITORING OF THE RTI REGIME IN INDIA 2011-13 RTI Assessment and Advisory Group (RAAG) Samya Center for Equity studies (SAMYA ) have published in October 2014 the work titled “PEOPLES’ MONITORING OF THE RTI REGIME IN INDIA: 2011-13.
Briefly looking into the contents of the above work, running into 177 pages of 11 chapters & 10 annexures, as noted in BCAJ December issue, I plan to serialise it and cover 1 & 2 chapters in each issue. In the last issue, chapter 1 was summarised. Hereunder is a summary of chapter 2:
METHODOLOGY:
Data Collection:
• Primary data collection through individual inter views:
A s a part of the Peoples’ RTI assessment 2011- 13, a total of 2,279 persons were individually interviewed across four states and the National Capital Region of Delhi.
• Primary data collection through street corner interviews:
2,000 people were individually interviewed in the capitals of the four sample states, and in Delhi.
• Primary data collection through focus group discussion:
In addition, a total of 95 focus group discussions (FSGs) were also organised.
• Primary data collection through focus public hearings:
A s part of the nationwide assessment on the implementation of the RTI Act, public hearings (PHs) were organized in the four sample states and in Delhi to documents peoples’ experience of using the RTI Act. The PHs were organised in collaboration with the state partners.
• Primary data collection through inspections:
Across the country, 69 public authorities and offices were inspected as a part of this assessment.
• Primary data collection through filing RTI applications:
Specifically, 462 RTI applications were filed and followed up with PIOs to get basic information from various public authorities across the country.
Data Analysis:
• Analysis of replies received to RTI applications:
Copies of 2,743 RTI applications were received from four states, the union territory of Delhi, and the Central Government, in response to the earlier mentioned RTI application filed with various public authorities.
• Analysis of published material:
Relevant papers, articles, studies and assessments on India and about other countries were identified and assessed for possible inputs into the design of methodology and process for this assessment. These have also been used to develop national and international contexts in which the findings of this assessment can be located.
• Analysis of the official websites of all ICs:
An analysis of the official websites of all ICs was undertaken with a view to ascertain whether the websites provide relevant and updated information on the functioning of the ICs, including number of commissioners in each commission, orders passed by the commissions, and their annual reports.
• Analysis of the official websites of PAs: T o check compliance with provisions of proactive disclosure, the websites of 30 public authorities were analysed.
Specially, the Peoples’ RTI Assessment 2011-13 sought to survey and otherwise access information from the following key RTI stakeholders:
Citizens
Applicants and appellants
Public Information Officers
Public Authorities
Scope and Sampling:
• States: T he assessment covered four states across the country, and the National Capital Region of Delhi. In each state, the state capital and two districts were surveyed.
• Public Authority:
A total of 69 public authorities (PAs) were surveyed across the country, by visiting them. Of these, 10 were from the Central Government, and four each from each of three states and one UT, and three from Bihar (total 19 – as permission to survey Bihar HQ police was not granted). In addition, in four states and one UT, four PAs were surveyed in each of the two sample district. This made it a total 40 PAs in ten district headquarters.
• Applicants:
A total of 192 applicants were interviewed as a part of this assessment. Of these, 12 were from rural areas and the remaining 180 were from urban areas. The rural applicants were identified by the rural field teams during their visits to the sample villages especially through the focus group discussions, and all the applicants identified, available and willing to talk to the team, were interviewed, irrespective of which PA they had applied to for information.
