Site news

PROMOTE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE WORKING OF EVERY PUBLIC AUTHORITY

 
 
Picture of System Administrator
PROMOTE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE WORKING OF EVERY PUBLIC AUTHORITY
by System Administrator - Tuesday, 17 February 2015, 1:01 AM
 

By: M.S.Yatnatti: Editor and Video Journalist Bangaluru : Promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority. Policy on Prevention, Detection, and Remediation of Fraud and Corruption by government is must and a major element of good governance is the control of corruption. For that reason, controlling corruption has been a key indicator. Good governance is a keystone of government.UPA government has given you RTI Act: Use It optimally :All opposition parties should use RTI optimally .Let they create booth wise RTI activists among their members or cadets and give them training and set of questions and gather that booth level information to perform better as opposition parties .Prime Minister should listion to opposition parties as they are voice of 66% voters. All responsible citizens should send RTI Question to each MP and each Minister and Prime Minister and get to know every day what they are doing and what they are performing and keep check on their performances and give them clear indication that India is awakened and want responsible Government which listens citizens.. All 70 MLAs and 543 MPs are public servants : After election are over all MLAs are public servants and they are MLA for all the constituency .All MLAs should chalk out their plans for development of their constituencies irrespective of who voted for them or who is not voted for them . THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005 is an Act to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority.RTI Act provides transparency under Section 3 and4(1) (a) (b) (c) and 2(f) of RTI Act 2005 and accountability under 4(1) (d) RTI Act 2005 as the PA will create information; or to interpret information; or to solve the problems raised by the applicants under the system and procedure as per listed Acts and rules regulations listed under 4(1) (a) (b) (c) every day and that can be cross cheeked by applicant by asking reasons under 4(1) (d) by the affected person and copy of the same can be given to any applicant under 2( f)of RTI Act .

Collect evidence under RTI Act .If you do not have sufficient evidence do not file complaint before lokayukta as most of the cases have ended in acquittal and embarrassment to complainant and lokayukta.Strangely, one of the most active Lokayuktas in the nation , in Karnataka, has failed to secure substantial convictions or is it indication of false complaints on the raise or prosecution is letting of the hook the culprits by omission and commissions .Either one need to be convicted. The officers who are filing false complaint and charge sheet need to be convicted. The officers who are distorting and destroying the evidence and helping in acquittal of corrupt also need to be checked. According to sources in Lokayukta the prime reason for the low rate of conviction is the interminable delay in trial. "It takes about three years to collect the evidence, take the statements of accused officers and calculate the proportion of (unaccounted wealth), and another seven years to get prosecution sanction from the government and commence the trial. Ten years is too long period for commencement of a case. There are several other reasons also that have led to the low rate of conviction,” he said. An analysis of the cases handled by the Karnataka Lokayukta during 1995-2011 using data obtained through the RTI Act provides such an opportunity. Lokayukta can investigate corruption cases either by traps initiated in response to complaints or raids conducted on the basis of information collected by the Lokayukta police. After a raid or trap, the Lokayukta police investigates the case, and if it is unable to find sufficient evidence to prosecute, then it is closed. Otherwise, a request is made to the competent authority to sanction prosecution. If the sanction is granted, the charge sheet is filed for trial. Tackling corruption requires a fundamental restructuring of the core administrative functions of the government, and the criminal legal system, which accounts for almost the entire delay in prosecution of corruption.Successful fraud prevention involves creating an environment which inhibits fraud. Taking immediate and vigorous action if fraud is detected is not only necessary to prevent future losses but also helps deter other frauds. A manager who is alert to the possibility of fraud and who acts accordingly on a day to day basis is a powerful deterrent to fraud.