A Great and Revolutionary Law? The First Four Years of India’s Right to Information Act
Identifieur interne : 005486 ( Main/Curation ); précédent : 005485; suivant : 005487A Great and Revolutionary Law? The First Four Years of India’s Right to Information Act
Auteurs : Alasdair RobertsSource :
- Public Administration Review [ 0033-3352 ] ; 2010-11.
Descripteurs français
- Wicri :
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Analysis group, Capacity building, Case studies, Central government, Central government ministries, Central information commission, Centre, Civil society organizations, Disclosure, Freedom house, Good governance, Governance, Half years, Indian bureaucracy, Indian citizens, Indian state, Individual commissioners, Information commission, Information laws, Large majority, Local government, Local levels, Lower levels, Many authorities, National coordination committee, National laws, Nations development programme, Noncompliance, Nongovernmental organizations, Older laws, Orissa, Orissa state information commission, Other countries, Oxford university press, Participatory, Participatory research, Pios, Poor compliance, Pria, Pria study, Pria survey, Pricewaterhousecoopers, Private schools, Proactive, Proactive disclosure, Proactive disclosure practices, Proactive disclosure requirements, Public administration review november december, Public authorities, Public authority, Public centre, Public services, Raag, Raag study, Raag survey, Requester, Rights initiative, Rtia, Rtia advocates, Rtia request, Rtia requests, Rural areas, Rural development, Rural pios, Secretariat training, Short time, Similar statutes, State commissioners, State government, State governments, State information commission, State information commissioners, Substantial evidence, Transparency.
- Teeft :
- Analysis group, Capacity building, Case studies, Central government, Central government ministries, Central information commission, Centre, Civil society organizations, Disclosure, Freedom house, Good governance, Governance, Half years, Indian bureaucracy, Indian citizens, Indian state, Individual commissioners, Information commission, Information laws, Large majority, Local government, Local levels, Lower levels, Many authorities, National coordination committee, National laws, Nations development programme, Noncompliance, Nongovernmental organizations, Older laws, Orissa, Orissa state information commission, Other countries, Oxford university press, Participatory, Participatory research, Pios, Poor compliance, Pria, Pria study, Pria survey, Pricewaterhousecoopers, Private schools, Proactive, Proactive disclosure, Proactive disclosure practices, Proactive disclosure requirements, Public administration review november december, Public authorities, Public authority, Public centre, Public services, Raag, Raag study, Raag survey, Requester, Rights initiative, Rtia, Rtia advocates, Rtia request, Rtia requests, Rural areas, Rural development, Rural pios, Secretariat training, Short time, Similar statutes, State commissioners, State government, State governments, State information commission, State information commissioners, Substantial evidence, Transparency.
Abstract
India’s 2005 Right to Information Act (RTIA) is among dozens of national laws recently adopted similar to the U.S. Freedom of Information Act. Drawing on several large studies examining the act’s implementation, the author finds that Indian citizens filed about 2 million requests for information under the RTIA during its first two and half years. However, use of the law was constrained by uneven public awareness, poor public planning, and bureaucratic indifference or outright hostility. Requirements for proactive disclosure of information are often ignored. The necessary mechanisms for enforcing the new law are also strained by a growing number of complaints and appeals. Nonetheless, RTIA advocates demonstrate its transformative potential and continue to press energetically for more effective implementation. Public authorities and civil society organizations have developed a number of practical innovations that may be useful for other developing countries to adopt when considering similar laws.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02224.x
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Istex, to step Corpus: Pour aller vers cette notice dans l'étape Curation :000525
- to stream Istex, to step Curation: Pour aller vers cette notice dans l'étape Curation :000525
- to stream Istex, to step Checkpoint: Pour aller vers cette notice dans l'étape Curation :001F90
- to stream Main, to step Merge: Pour aller vers cette notice dans l'étape Curation :005529
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:0AEA848569234F764AB0072C01D2DEF272D57B36Curation
No country items
Alasdair Roberts<affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="no comma">E-mail: alasdair.roberts@gmail.com</wicri:noCountry>
</affiliation>
Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">A Great and Revolutionary Law? The First Four Years of India’s Right to Information Act</title>
<author><name sortKey="Roberts, Alasdair" sort="Roberts, Alasdair" uniqKey="Roberts A" first="Alasdair" last="Roberts">Alasdair Roberts</name>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno>
<idno type="RBID">ISTEX:0AEA848569234F764AB0072C01D2DEF272D57B36</idno>
<date when="2010" year="2010">2010</date>
<idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02224.x</idno>
<idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/0AEA848569234F764AB0072C01D2DEF272D57B36/fulltext/pdf</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000525</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">000525</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">000525</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Checkpoint">001F90</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Checkpoint">001F90</idno>
<idno type="wicri:doubleKey">0033-3352:2010:Roberts A:a:great:and</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Merge">005529</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Curation">005486</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">A Great and Revolutionary Law? The First Four Years of India’s Right to Information Act</title>
<author><name sortKey="Roberts, Alasdair" sort="Roberts, Alasdair" uniqKey="Roberts A" first="Alasdair" last="Roberts">Alasdair Roberts</name>
<affiliation></affiliation>
<affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="no comma">E-mail: alasdair.roberts@gmail.com</wicri:noCountry>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<monogr></monogr>
<series><title level="j" type="main">Public Administration Review</title>
<title level="j" type="alt">PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0033-3352</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1540-6210</idno>
<imprint><biblScope unit="vol">70</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">6</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="925">925</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="933">933</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page-count">9</biblScope>
<publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher>
<pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="2010-11">2010-11</date>
</imprint>
<idno type="ISSN">0033-3352</idno>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0033-3352</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Analysis group</term>
<term>Capacity building</term>
<term>Case studies</term>
<term>Central government</term>
<term>Central government ministries</term>
<term>Central information commission</term>
<term>Centre</term>
<term>Civil society organizations</term>
<term>Disclosure</term>
<term>Freedom house</term>
<term>Good governance</term>
<term>Governance</term>
<term>Half years</term>
<term>Indian bureaucracy</term>
<term>Indian citizens</term>
<term>Indian state</term>
<term>Individual commissioners</term>
<term>Information commission</term>
<term>Information laws</term>
<term>Large majority</term>
<term>Local government</term>
<term>Local levels</term>
<term>Lower levels</term>
<term>Many authorities</term>
<term>National coordination committee</term>
<term>National laws</term>
<term>Nations development programme</term>
<term>Noncompliance</term>
<term>Nongovernmental organizations</term>
<term>Older laws</term>
<term>Orissa</term>
<term>Orissa state information commission</term>
<term>Other countries</term>
<term>Oxford university press</term>
<term>Participatory</term>
<term>Participatory research</term>
<term>Pios</term>
<term>Poor compliance</term>
<term>Pria</term>
<term>Pria study</term>
<term>Pria survey</term>
<term>Pricewaterhousecoopers</term>
<term>Private schools</term>
<term>Proactive</term>
<term>Proactive disclosure</term>
<term>Proactive disclosure practices</term>
<term>Proactive disclosure requirements</term>
<term>Public administration review november december</term>
<term>Public authorities</term>
<term>Public authority</term>
<term>Public centre</term>
<term>Public services</term>
<term>Raag</term>
<term>Raag study</term>
<term>Raag survey</term>
<term>Requester</term>
<term>Rights initiative</term>
<term>Rtia</term>
<term>Rtia advocates</term>
<term>Rtia request</term>
<term>Rtia requests</term>
<term>Rural areas</term>
<term>Rural development</term>
<term>Rural pios</term>
<term>Secretariat training</term>
<term>Short time</term>
<term>Similar statutes</term>
<term>State commissioners</term>
<term>State government</term>
<term>State governments</term>
<term>State information commission</term>
<term>State information commissioners</term>
<term>Substantial evidence</term>
<term>Transparency</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Analysis group</term>
<term>Capacity building</term>
<term>Case studies</term>
<term>Central government</term>
<term>Central government ministries</term>
<term>Central information commission</term>
<term>Centre</term>
<term>Civil society organizations</term>
<term>Disclosure</term>
<term>Freedom house</term>
<term>Good governance</term>
<term>Governance</term>
<term>Half years</term>
<term>Indian bureaucracy</term>
<term>Indian citizens</term>
<term>Indian state</term>
<term>Individual commissioners</term>
<term>Information commission</term>
<term>Information laws</term>
<term>Large majority</term>
<term>Local government</term>
<term>Local levels</term>
<term>Lower levels</term>
<term>Many authorities</term>
<term>National coordination committee</term>
<term>National laws</term>
<term>Nations development programme</term>
<term>Noncompliance</term>
<term>Nongovernmental organizations</term>
<term>Older laws</term>
<term>Orissa</term>
<term>Orissa state information commission</term>
<term>Other countries</term>
<term>Oxford university press</term>
<term>Participatory</term>
<term>Participatory research</term>
<term>Pios</term>
<term>Poor compliance</term>
<term>Pria</term>
<term>Pria study</term>
<term>Pria survey</term>
<term>Pricewaterhousecoopers</term>
<term>Private schools</term>
<term>Proactive</term>
<term>Proactive disclosure</term>
<term>Proactive disclosure practices</term>
<term>Proactive disclosure requirements</term>
<term>Public administration review november december</term>
<term>Public authorities</term>
<term>Public authority</term>
<term>Public centre</term>
<term>Public services</term>
<term>Raag</term>
<term>Raag study</term>
<term>Raag survey</term>
<term>Requester</term>
<term>Rights initiative</term>
<term>Rtia</term>
<term>Rtia advocates</term>
<term>Rtia request</term>
<term>Rtia requests</term>
<term>Rural areas</term>
<term>Rural development</term>
<term>Rural pios</term>
<term>Secretariat training</term>
<term>Short time</term>
<term>Similar statutes</term>
<term>State commissioners</term>
<term>State government</term>
<term>State governments</term>
<term>State information commission</term>
<term>State information commissioners</term>
<term>Substantial evidence</term>
<term>Transparency</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Wicri" type="topic" xml:lang="fr"><term>Administration centrale</term>
<term>Gouvernance</term>
<term>Administration locale</term>
<term>Pouvoirs publics</term>
<term>Développement rural</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">India’s 2005 Right to Information Act (RTIA) is among dozens of national laws recently adopted similar to the U.S. Freedom of Information Act. Drawing on several large studies examining the act’s implementation, the author finds that Indian citizens filed about 2 million requests for information under the RTIA during its first two and half years. However, use of the law was constrained by uneven public awareness, poor public planning, and bureaucratic indifference or outright hostility. Requirements for proactive disclosure of information are often ignored. The necessary mechanisms for enforcing the new law are also strained by a growing number of complaints and appeals. Nonetheless, RTIA advocates demonstrate its transformative potential and continue to press energetically for more effective implementation. Public authorities and civil society organizations have developed a number of practical innovations that may be useful for other developing countries to adopt when considering similar laws.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
</record>
Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Main/Curation
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 005486 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Curation/biblio.hfd -nk 005486 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien |wiki= Wicri/Santé |area= EdenteV2 |flux= Main |étape= Curation |type= RBID |clé= ISTEX:0AEA848569234F764AB0072C01D2DEF272D57B36 |texte= A Great and Revolutionary Law? The First Four Years of India’s Right to Information Act }}
![]() | This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. | ![]() |