New Delhi: The Supreme Court today dismissed the plea of the Enforcement Directorate challenging the Central Information Commission order to produce the file of "oil-for-food scam" before it to peruse the agency's investigations and decide on their disclosure.
The bench comprising Justice A K Ganguly and Justice G S Singhvi trashed the arguments put forth by Government against the production of file before the CIC.
Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam, in his argument, raised a question mark over the powers of the Central Information Commission to peruse the ongoing investigations conducted by the Enforcement Directorate.
In his observations, Justice Ganguly said there was so much of corruption in the country and RTI Act was a "breath of fresh air".
He said the Act has even been applied to the judiciary and "we welcome it."
"It is a reflection on the government that they brought this matter upto the Supreme Court. The ED kept saying that they are investigating the case for the last five years but they are shying to show the progress to Central Information Commission. The file will now have to be shown to the CIC," Prashant Bhushan, senior lawyer appearing for the Supreme Court, said.
RTI applicant Arun Agrawal had sought the entire file containing note sheets relating to the report of Virendra Dayal, appointed by the government as special envoy to coordinate with UN officials on the Paul Volcker Committee report.
The Paul Volcker Committee was set up by the United Nations in April 2004 to probe corruption and fraud in its Oil-for-Food Programme in Iraq, which saw the ouster of former External Affairs minister Natwar Singh for his alleged involvement.
The Central Information Commission had directed the Enforcement Directorate to produce the file before it before deciding on the records' exemption from disclosure under the RTI Act. The Enforcement Directorate had challenged the decision in the High Court pleading that CIC had expanded the scope of the appeal pending before it.
It said the Commission cannot call for records pertaining to ongoing investigations in the light of its limited powers.
However, the High Court had said "CIC has jurisdiction to decide whether proviso to Section 24 (1) of the Act is applicable and whether conditions mentioned in section 8(1) of the Act are satisfied. To satisfy and have a just and fair decision, CIC can direct production of records and examine them."
After being snubbed by the Delhi High Court for seeking exemption from inspection of records in the oil-for-food scam by CIC, the Enforcement Directorate had approached the Supreme Court.
-PTI 9.7.10
The bench comprising Justice A K Ganguly and Justice G S Singhvi trashed the arguments put forth by Government against the production of file before the CIC.
In his observations, Justice Ganguly said there was so much of corruption in the country and RTI Act was a "breath of fresh air".
He said the Act has even been applied to the judiciary and "we welcome it."
"It is a reflection on the government that they brought this matter upto the Supreme Court. The ED kept saying that they are investigating the case for the last five years but they are shying to show the progress to Central Information Commission. The file will now have to be shown to the CIC," Prashant Bhushan, senior lawyer appearing for the Supreme Court, said.
RTI applicant Arun Agrawal had sought the entire file containing note sheets relating to the report of Virendra Dayal, appointed by the government as special envoy to coordinate with UN officials on the Paul Volcker Committee report.
The Paul Volcker Committee was set up by the United Nations in April 2004 to probe corruption and fraud in its Oil-for-Food Programme in Iraq, which saw the ouster of former External Affairs minister Natwar Singh for his alleged involvement.
The Central Information Commission had directed the Enforcement Directorate to produce the file before it before deciding on the records' exemption from disclosure under the RTI Act. The Enforcement Directorate had challenged the decision in the High Court pleading that CIC had expanded the scope of the appeal pending before it.
It said the Commission cannot call for records pertaining to ongoing investigations in the light of its limited powers.
However, the High Court had said "CIC has jurisdiction to decide whether proviso to Section 24 (1) of the Act is applicable and whether conditions mentioned in section 8(1) of the Act are satisfied. To satisfy and have a just and fair decision, CIC can direct production of records and examine them."
After being snubbed by the Delhi High Court for seeking exemption from inspection of records in the oil-for-food scam by CIC, the Enforcement Directorate had approached the Supreme Court.
-PTI 9.7.10
No comments:
Post a Comment