September 6, 2014
Destruction of Record by
the MHA Post May 2014
Dear all,
Readers may remember the
furore in the Rajya Sabha on
9th July when an Hon'ble Member raised
an issue of destruction of files of historical value as alleged in news
reports published that day. Several members expressed their concern over
this alleged files destruction. First, the Union Minister for Law and
Justice denied that any file of historical importance was destroyed and
the Government agreed to come out with a statement two days later. On
11th July, the Union Home Minister made
a statement in the House denying that any files of historical
significance were destroyed. He reported that 11,100 files containing an
unspecified number of papers were destroyed between June-July, 2014
pursuant to the directions of the Prime Minister to the Secretaries of
all Departments. This matter was discussed again next week on the 14th,
with the Home Minister giving some more clarifications on the issue. The
unofficial verbatim text of the debates for the 9th,
11th and 14th of June are accessible on
the Rajya Sabha website at: http://164.100.47.5/debatenew/newshow.aspx.
Please look under the records for debates during the Zero Hour on those
days. I am not circulating a copy of the debates as that would amount to
violation of the practice and procedure of Parliament. Only official and
corrected versions of the debate may be published by any person.
Having read news reports of
the debate on the destruction of a large number of files, I submitted a
request for information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI
Act) asking the following information. The reply received is keyed below
each query (see attachment):
1) A clear photocopy of the
list containing the subject matter of each of the 11,100 files and records
that were weeded out/destroyed by your Ministry along with a clear
indication of their categorization- such as Category A’, ‘B’ and C’’
accorded to them prior to such destruction;
Reply: List
of files which are destroyed is being compiled. This can be made available
in due course on payment of requisite fee. You may write to us if so
desired.
2) The number of the
Officer(s) of your Ministry along with their designations who authorised
the clearing of the said files and papers (names are not required);
Reply: A copy of letter No. NIL dated 05.06.2014 from the
Cabinet Secretary is attached. Para (f) thereof refers.
3) The designation(s) of
the representative(s) of the National Archives that were present at the
time of weeding out of the said files as required under para #113 of the
Central Secretariat Manual of Office Procedure (names are not required);
Reply: -do
(i.e., same as above reply).
4) A clear photocopy of the
half-yearly report of the records weeded out during the latest clearing
exercise, prepared by your Ministry for submission to the Director General
Archives, as per Rule 9(4) of the Public Records Rules, 1997;
Reply: No
such report has been sent to National Archives of India.
5) The exact number and
subject matter of files originally classified: “top secret”, “secret” and
“confidential” that were declassified and deposited with the Director
General, National Archives of India under Rule 7(3) of the Public
Records Rules, 1997, if any;
Reply: Nil.
6) The exact number and
subject matter of files accorded with the security classification: “top
secret”, “secret” and “confidential” that were weeded out, if any;
Reply: Nil.
7) A clear description of
the manner of disposal of the records that were cleared, namely the number
of files incinerated (burned) and/or shredded."
Reply: Record
Retention Schedule of MHA is available on the website of MHA (Website:
mha.gov.in). This list can be made available on payment of requisite
fee.
What is problematic with
this reply?
The Public Information
Officer's reply is more vague than the Home Minister's statements in the
Rajya Sabha for the following reasons:
1) Even after more than
a month of destroying the 11,100 files, the MHA does not have, in one
comprehensive list, details of all files that were destroyed.
Having looked at records management practices in some detail during my
decade-long career of advocating for transparency in government, I find
it surprising that the MHA went about destroying files without even
preparing a list of files for review, first. The Home Minister stated in
the Rajya Sabha that records were weeded out in accordance with Para
#113 of the Central Secretariat's Manual of Office Procedure (CS-MOP).
Para #113(4) states that the Department records room must send a list of
files ripe for reviewing and destruction/ archivisation in January each
year in quarterly lots. The PIO's reply that the even the list of
files that were weeded out has not been compiled till date indicates
that the procedure for properly identifying files for weeding out was
simply not followed. The CS-MOP is available at: http://darpg.nic.in/darpgwebsite_cms/Document/file/CSMOP.pdf
Further, Section 4(1)(a) of
the RTI Act states that all public authorities including the MHA must
index, catalogue, computerise and network the records they hold in
custody. If the MHA's divisions did not have a preliminary list of files
to be reviewed for destruction, how exactly did the weeding out process
take place? Did the 500 officers whom the Home Minister stated as being
involved in the weeding out exercise, simply walked to the records rooms
or the shelves where the old files were kept and started weeding them
out one by one? The refusal to give details of this process both
to Parliament when the issue was debated and now when a request is made
under RTI, is shocking to say the least. What worsens the case is the
audacity of the PIO's reply sent more than 30 days after the request was
received in the MHA that the information will be given only on payment
of fees. Under the RTI Act it is simply not open to a PIO to charge any
fees for giving information after 30 days. Nor can the supply of
information be deferred to a date beyond 30 days.
2) The Home Minister informed
Parliament that 500 officials were involved in the weeding out exercise.
No further details were given. When I asked for only the designations of
such officers because officers of all grades and ranks are not permitted
to authorise destruction of official records, a vague reply is given to
me. Para (f) of the Cabinet Secretary's letter only states that the
entire process of weeding out files must be done in accordance with
rules of record keeping including digitisation within 3-4 weeks.
The PIO's reply to this query is simply not a sensible reply at all. Let
alone the names, even the designations of the officers who authorised
destruction of files is being denied under the RTI Act in a roundabout
manner. This is not in keeping with the promise of
transparency that was made when this Government took over the reins of
power in Delhi. Citizen taxpayers have the right to know who authorised
the destruction of files, as the salary billl for the officers' time
spent on this work is footed by them.
3) Para #113(2) of the CS-MOP
requires that records that are more than 25 years old be reviewed for
archivisation in consultation with the National Archives. However
the PIO's reply indicates that National Archives was not consulted at
all during this weeding our process. So how old were the records that
were weeded out is a serious question which was not satisfactorily
answered either in Parliament or in response to my RTI application.
4) Para #113(7) of the CS-MOP
requires that Category 'A' and 'B' records that are not weeded out be
sent to the Archives for preservation, if not required for reference
within the Department. These records are meant for preservation for 25
years or more. However the PIO's reply indicates that no file classified
'top secret', 'secret' or 'confidential' was sent to the National
Archives in June-July, 2014. It is only obvious that files of shorter
lifespan would also not have been sent to the Archives for preservation
as they may not contain information of historical value that is worth
preserving. What then was destroyed in June-July 2014 is a mystery
that neither the Home Minister's reply in the Rajya Sabha nor the PIO's
reply clarifies. The only saving grace is that no classified record
(i.e., top secret, secret or confidential) was destroyed. Even there we
simply have to take the MHA's word for it.
5) The PIO's reply to my query
about the manner of destruction is also vague. According to the CS-MOP
records may be destroyed either by shredding or burning. The answer to
my query has to be "one of the two" or "both" depending upon the choice
of mode of destruction made by the MHA. Nevertheless I looked through
the MHA's website but could not find the record retention (RR) schedule
anywhere on the website. The 3-4 line explanation given under Section
4(1)(b) RTI manuals under clauses (iii), (iv), (v) and (vi) is childish
and shows scant respect for a law made by Parliament. These manuals have
not been updated since they were first drawn up several years ago. See: http://mha.nic.in/infoundrsec
However is readers find the RR schedule on the MHA's website, kindly
alert me and I will reconsider my views on this subject.
The Hon'ble Home
Minister and his senior officers have a lot of 'homework' to do if they
are to truly deliver on the Hon'ble Prime Minister's promise of
increased transparency in the Central Government's actions and greater
accountability to the people of India. This kind of transparency cannot
be accomplished through Twitter or Facebook or other social media. What
is required to be done is something akin to what Norway has done with
its offcial records. See http:oep.no The meta data about all
files generated and held by public authorities is published online. A
request under their RTI law may be made for any of these documents
through this website. If a requested document is not covered by any
exemption, it is emailed to the requestor within a week. I have received
some official documents in this manner when I tested out this facility.
India has a lot of work to do if it wants to join the groups of nations
that practise the transparency they preach.
Obituary:
It is with great sadness
that I learnt about the passing on of Mr. Balraj Puri, noted journalist
and crusader for human rights in India. He was a founder member of the
National Campaign for People's Right to Information. He was a dear
friend and mentor. At a conference to discuss RTI which I helped
organise in Jammu and Kashmir a few years ago, he gave invaluable advice
to the policymakers to revise the old RTI law and make its practices and
procedures similar to the Central RTI Act. His contribution to the cause
of human rights and peace in J&K will always be remembered with great
respect. This email alert is dedicated to his memory.
Kindly circulate this email
widely.
Thanks
Venkatesh Nayak
Programme Coordinator
Access to Information
Programme
Commonwealth Human Rights
Initiative
Information