I received an invitation from CIC to be on one of
three panels in its 2-day national convention to mark
one-year-of RTI in mid October. The invitation did not
say why I was invited at all or specifically for panel
no.2 (future of RTI, even as I am duty-bound to
survey-analyse-plan-monitor and not otherwise opine on
future, and can hardly be mistaken for gypsy-woman
with crystal-ball). Even if I were to accept (without
admitting, for argument sake, etc etc, as MIB say)
that birthday-party invitation to me, as a fairly
regular visitor to CIC, was in order, I would have put
me on panel no.1 (stock-taking, in view of my frequent
fussing in complaints, appeals and applications) or
panel no.3 (info access, in view of my s.4 fixation
and of the GAMS complaint in which I was C.4).

I thought the invitation was by mistake. In any event,
I like birthday-parties with cake and balloons and
proper party games, not luminaries being scholarly or
activist on panels. So I did not send the line of
consent that the invitation requested. No one scolded
and I was greatly relieved.

Now I (and others whom I have been accompanying to
CIC) have been getting these Dear-Friends invitations
from that outfit called Parivartan, which is having on
24 Sep afternoon its own RTI birthday-party (to be
joined by Chief and two other Information
Commissioners). These Dear-Friends invitations seem
issued per Appellant or Complainant and ask to send,
to Parivartan, a note on what was asked what was got
etc. Dear-Friends are assured Parivartan will try
accommodate as many presentations as possible and
surely mention all the notes! This unstructured
participatory documentation will I suppose dominate
panel no.1 in the CIC convention and also (mis)inform
panel no.2 and may be also panel no.3

I also learn that editor of ITPI journal has been
asked to edit the papers received by CIC. ITPI, btw,
is Institute of Town Planners India whose pompous
President informed me when I went looking for CPIO
(after Deptt of Commerce replied to my s.4 on GATS to
make shocking revelations about plans for planners)
that it is private office not in purview of RTI Act.
Nor, of course, is Parivartan in the purview of RTI
Act (and there is also this mention in the minutes of
CIC meeting of 1 Aug from which I cannot make out
whether Parivartan proprietor/manager was rude to my
CIC or has proposed it be your-honoured, to both of
which I object.
http://www.cic.gov.in/CIC-Minutes/Minutes01082006.pdf
(item 8)  

Meanwhile, otherwise, a number of RTI concerns raised
in my appeals/complaints are being considered by the
CIC now, eg:
http://www.cic.gov.in/CIC-Minutes/Minutes05092006.pdf
(items 3,6,9)
http://www.cic.gov.in/CIC-Minutes/Minutes08082006.pdf
(items 4,6)
http://www.cic.gov.in/CIC-Minutes/Minutes01082006.pdf
(item 4)
So I can no longer generally fuss that s.6 fixated
NGO-and-activists dominated the Bill drafting and are
dominating the Act implementing inclusive of CIC, as
it seemed previously, eg:
http://www.cic.gov.in/CIC-Minutes/Minutes-27-06-2006.pdf
(item 4)
http://www.cic.gov.in/CIC-Minutes/Minutes03052006.pdf
(item 6)
http://www.cic.gov.in/CIC-Minutes/Minutes-04-04-2006.pdf
(item 4)

The CIC issue I am furious about at the moment is that
I did not place on record (and only discussed with the
nice Under Secy who has left) my plannerly suggestion
that CIC (institutional/PSP use activity) not shift to
Bhikaji (commercial use zone). It is going ahead, to
become willful mis-user:
http://www.cic.gov.in/CIC-Minutes/Minutes22082006.pdf
But this is not (directly) an RTI issue and ought not
to be aired at birthday Convention. And in the
Parivartan birthday-bash it is not going to be allowed
to be aired: the Dear-Friends invitations are all
issued from G-3/17 Sunder Nagari, suggesting mis-use,
and Parivartan is very much part of the circle of
Dear-Friends NGOs whose latest common cause was to try
and piously get their rampant mis-use legalized in the
definitely illegal MLU notification (by, if you
please, claiming parity with professions, not
business).

Of course there are numerous RTI issues that bother me
and nearly none of my Appeals and Complaints have
reached satisfactory conclusion (and by that I do not
mean I did not *win*: my RTI engagements are all
non-adversarial and part of personal-interest
exploration of the diabolical architecture of the RTI
Act that was not quite put to public scrutiny before
the NAC drafted Bill was tabled and passed). However,
I see no reason at all either to extrapolate from my
limited exploratory research lessons for future of RTI
in CIC convention panel no.2 (via paper to be edited
by editor of journal of pompous private-office ITPI)
or to report my insights in note to pompous
private-outfit Parivartan that is apparently mis-user
and certainly no Dear-Friend of mine.

Is any one having regular unpretentious birthday party
for RTI? I ought to be invited: I have been regularly
playing with the toddler without causing it any
distress (unlike its nannies who are all the time
taking it to baby-shows to show-off).

- gita