New Delhi: The CIC has allowed disclosure of information related to Prime Minister's health already present in public domain, due to extensive media coverage like recent cardiac surgery of present incumbent.
However, citing reasons of national security, protection of individual's right to privacy and the fiduciary nature of information, the transparency watchdog was of the view that rest of the information should be withheld.
The decision came a month after Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah rejected a similar plea seeking details of ailments present and former Prime Minister.
"The health and medical problems of present and former Prime Ministers which already exist in the public domain, due to extensive media coverage, like the recent cardiac surgery of present Prime Minister, may be given," Information Commissioner Annapurna Dixit held.
Exercising his Right to Information, petitioner Ashwini Shrivastava had asked the PMO to give details of health and medical problems of present and former Prime Ministers alongwith the details of expenditure borne on their treatment by the government.
In his order, Habibullah had directed that details of expenses incurred during the treatment be given since they are made from public exchequer, but in present order Dixit remained silent on the issue.
The PMO had transferred the RTI application to the
Department of Health and Family Welfare under the Ministry of
Health, which refused the information saying the medical care
scheme for Prime Minister as a "classified document".
While hearing the appeal filed by the applicant, the CIC
said "The Commission observes that the information, as sought
by the Appellant being fiduciary in nature is clearly exempt
under provisions of Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act."
The said Section bars to make public the details available
to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the
competent authority is satisfied that the larger public
interest warrants disclosure of such information.
"The said information is held by the Respondent Public
Authority in fiduciary capacity on behalf of their patient (in
this case, the Prime Minister). So whether the patient is a
Head of a State or a common person, the information
nevertheless remains fiduciary and is exempt from disclosure
to the public at large...
"It is held by the Commission that the information as
sought by the Appellant is exempt on the threefold grounds of
national security, protection of individual’s right to privacy
and also because the information is available with the DGHS in
fiduciary capacity," the Commission said.
Bureau Report
First Published: Tuesday, November 3, 2009, 19:00