Hon'ble Prime Minister of India Dr. Manmohan Singh,
Hon'ble Finance Minister of India Shri Pranab Mukherjee,
Hon'ble Law Minister of India Dr. M. Veerappa Moily,
Hon'ble Law Minister of India Hon'ble Chief Justice of India Shri K. G. Balkrishanan,
Hon'ble Sirs,
Right to Information Act, 2005, is a very powerful tool in the hands of the citizenry of India, to check and eliminate the corruption, disparity, nepotism and to establish a good accountable governance in the country, which causes serious threats in the minds of Power Mongers and corrupts, thus they are creating a powerful lobby to disallow the people to use this tool, to check corruption and wrong decisions, ignoring the basic democratic principal that the democracy is of the People and for the people, therefore must be governed by the People, under the Supremacy of the Citizenry.
Government must remember that once, Smt. Indira Gandhi, was people's powerful leader, but in the subsequent events, under the wrong advices from her Kitchen Cabinet, she imposed Emergency and suffered a defeat. Similarly, Shri Rajiv Gandhi got majority of Votes, which cast so far in the General Elections held immediately after the death of Smt. Indira Gandhi, but in the next General Election, he lost the powers, under the impact of Smt. Sonia Gandhi’s Friend Quottroachi’s Boffors scam.
Now-a-days it appears that BJP is dumped its credibility, result thereof appears amongst Congressmen that they gets permanency in the powers and as such the Law (RTI Act), which once Congress Party, the Prime Minister himself and other Ministers claimed and declared as a Law which was enacted as the Best Law in last 60 years of Independence, and best law of its own kind in the entire world, now under aforesaid changed situation, the Congress Party and its Government is planning to amend to snatch people’s tool to disallow to check on corruption, and wrong doings. The Present Hon'ble CJI, for the reason best known to His Lordship, also join the Congress's such Thought Wagon, and Government wants to take advantage of this advantageous situation created and provided by CJI, thus mulls Changes in RTI Act, as per the News Item published in the Times of India dated 7th December, 2009.
The News published in Times of India dated 7th December, 2009 under Heading Govt mulls changes in RTI Act, has raised the following important questions, which will be liable to be answered by the Government, before taking a final decision to amend the Right to Informatioin Act, 2005:-
Whether CJI or other Judges of Supreme Court are not Human Beings, thus they are far from any human errors?
If they are also Human Beings and there are every possibility of Human Errors, from them, then how one can ensure that a Collegiums being constituted and comprises from the CJI and three other Judges, cannot embraced by any human errors, although same might be without any bad intention, but result thereof bound to cause immense damaging effects for a very long time, due to wrong selection of a Judges in Supreme Court or in the High Courts? (In this respect I am posting one detail which itself is evident that Appointment of Judges are not beyond any Human Error)
Is it not a fact that in every matter, where allegation of corruption or fraud or wrong doings can be leveled, in the respective files some information, are bound to contain and can be defined as sensitive. If all these information are required to be exempted, this means Government need to repeal the entire Right to Information Act, 2005, instead of its amendment.
The impact of various Supreme Court Judgments can be defined that “The Judiciary, Executive and Legislature have to be accountable to people, but now the CJI and the Government wants to amend this principal by amending RTI Act.
If exemption is allowed on the ground of "vexatious and frivolous" applications, every application can be justified as "vexatious and frivolous" applications, on some or other grounds.
Excluding the access to the "file notings" from the purview of the RTI Act and the decision making process, and "discussion/consultations which take place before arriving at a decision" means repeal of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Had the RTI Act not have ben there, I would not been allowed to have access to the file-noting regarding unconstitutional amendment of Supreme Court Rules, 966 wef December, 1997 being caused under a criminal conspiracy by Justice A. M. Ahmadi keeping all most all the fellow judges in dark about his basic objective to curb the Fundamental Right of Citizen to move Supreme Court guaranteed under Article 32 of the Constitution. I was severe victim of such unconstitutional amendment, under the gratification or influence of the some agent of the Kolkata Land Mafia. Silence on my complaints on this issue from Hon’ble CJI Mr. K. G. Balakrishnan is indicating His Lordship’s mindsets that he is against people’s fundamental rights.
Under His Lordship’s such mindset Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan recently written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh seeking his help in exempting matters relating to administration of justice from the purview of RTI Act. The letter highlights the process of judicial appointment in India on the basis of a Supreme Court judgment and pointed out that under the prevailing process, the meeting of the collegium seldom put in writing its views on persons who were rejected from being appointed as judges of high courts or the Supreme Court, and that there were other sensitive matters relating to administration of justice, which if divulged could create division within the judiciary and ultimately tell upon its independence, the letter said. Highly placed sources said the PM shared the CJI's concern and forwarded the letter to the law ministry for appropriate action. The CJI wrote to the PM that secrecy around the selection process of judges was not unique to India . In US, he argued, information about selection of judges could only be given to the public after 15 years of the event and in Australia , it was completely exempted from the purview of the right to information of public. (It means His Lordship is advising that Government that Government should withdraw its declaration that Right to Information Act, 2005 is best in the entire world.).
Now it became clear that why CJI wanted to curb the RTI for Supreme Court, because the CJI is also a human being thus cannot escape from the a system developed in last 62 years of independence and prevailing after embraced by corruption at high levels, thus he too wants to accommodate the Judges, Royal to Power Centers, whatever may be their credentials. I am talking with reference to a News item published in the Times of India dated 30/11/2009 under heading 'Dinakarakan probe over to govt', in which my interested matter is fresh recommendation by the Supreme Court collegium for the Chief Justice of Bombay High Court Swatantra Kumar for appointment as Supreme Court Judge, since he was appointed as Chief Justice of Bombay High Court from a Judge in Delhi High Court within 15 days from the date of his unconstitutional dismissal order of my Writ Petition, which was filed on the basis of allegiance of Smt. Sonia Gandhi and Shri Rahul Gandhi to the Italian Constitution, prevails permanently. My Writ Petition was based on the guidelines emerged from the Supreme Court Judgment in the matter of Smt. Sonia Gandhi and also based on Italian Documents. As such I filed application for according sanction to prosecute interalia Justice Swatantra Kumar, but Information received from the Supreme Court Registry, says that my all three letters on the above referred subject were placed before the Chief Justice of India, but he taken no cognisance. This means Judges are the God and are entitled even to violate the efficacy of the Constitution and even than they are considered to be legitimate for promotions. (Details of Complaints and application for according sanction to Prosecute Shri Swatantra Kumar is posted at https://sonia-rahul-gandh.tripod.com). Had the CJI placed this fact before the Collegiums which recommended the name of Justice Swatantra Kumar for appointment as Supreme Court Judge? If not, then His Lordship has performed his Constitutional Duties?
I can only say that if in USA he could have passed similar Order/Judgment, then could not have been considered as legitimate candidate for appointment as Judge in Supreme Court. But in India when a Top Leader of National Political Party is allowed to hide the true fact about her allegiance to a Foreign State, then why a Judge should not be allowed to pass illegal orders, to gains some favours like appointments as Chief Justice of a High Court and then as a Judge in Supreme Court? This is not wrong in a Country like India , when every politician is keeping mum from raising this serious issue in the Parliament, means they are working just for self benefits, even at the cost of the Constitutional efficacy.
I hope that before taking any decision, the Government must consider all the aforesaid facts and should not ignore the people's powers, for benefit of some vested interests.
