Umer Maqbool 
Srinagar: The Union home ministry has refused to provide a copy of the file on amendments made in the Jammu & Kashmir Government Business Rules, giving sweeping powers to the lieutenant governor of the Union Territory, which would soon see an elected government after a gap of nearly six years. The controversial amendments evoked widespread criticism in J&K, with Opposition parties alleging that they would further undermine powers of future elected governments of J&K.
In response to an application filed by this reporter under the Right to Information Act 2005, seeking a copy of the file notings and correspondences with different Union ministries and Jammu & Kashmir administration with respect to the “Transaction of Business of the Government of Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir (Second Amendment) Rules, 2024,” the home ministry refused to provide these documents, citing safety reasons and the confidentiality clause.
“The information sought by you attracts of provision of Section 8(l)(e) and 8(l)(g) of the RTI Act, 2005 vide which there shall no obligation to give information to any citizen,” the home ministry said in its written response to the application.
The Union home ministry’s response to the application filed under the Right to Information Act 2005 seeking copy of the file notings and correspondences with different Union ministries and Jammu & Kashmir administration with respect to the Transaction of Business of the Government of Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir (Second Amendment) Rules, 2024.
While section 8(1) (e) exempts disclosure of information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information, section 8 (1)(g) bars information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes.
Rights activists and other stakeholders questioned denial of information about these amendments by the home ministry.
“The CPIO’s reply is bewildering to say the very least,” Venkatesh Nayak, director, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) told The Wire.
Also read: The Polls Have Made J&K a Battleground of Relevance, Fragmentation and Proxy Politics
He underlined that the RTI Act was crafted to enable citizens who are the primary stakeholders of our democracy to obtain access to information about the working of governments and other public authorities.
“People have the right to know the details of the entire decision making process about governmental actions that affect them,” Nayak said.
He mentioned that the information about the process and the purpose behind amending the Business Rules is in the nature of information that ought to have been disclosed suo motu under Section 4(1)(c) and 4(1)(d) of the RTI Act as it is an important policy decision and affects people not only in J&K but others elsewhere in the country.
“Further under the proviso to Section 8(1)(i) the reasons behind these amendments ought to have been made public after the Union cabinet accorded its approval to these proposals,” Nayak added.
He noted that invoking 8(1)(e) of the Act is illegitimate because there is no fiduciary relationship between any of the authorities involved in the decision making process.
“The Supreme Court has clarified multiple times that there is no fiduciary relationship involved in the performance of statutory or constitutional function,” he said.
Nayak added that invoking 8(1) (g) of the Act appears to be unnecessary because nobody’s life will be endangered by disclosure of such information nor do the details of the process of making the amendments reveal the identity of any intelligence informers unless the home ministry seeks to ascribe that role to its own officials or to those of the J&K administration.
Former Judge of the J&K high court and ex-MP Hasnain Masoodi said that this information should have been disclosed by the home ministry.“There was no harm in sharing this information. The information can be denied only in exceptional circumstances.”
Amendments in business rules and criticism
On July 12 this year, the home ministry notified the “Transaction of Business of the Government of Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir (Second Amendment) Rules, 2024,” enhancing the powers of the lieutenant governor of J&K.
As per these amendments, the lieutenant governor would decide on transfers and postings of administrative secretaries and cadre posts of All India Services and appointment of advocate general and other law officers.
This essentially also brings appointment of Jammu & Kashmir Administrative Services (JKAS) officers as administrative secretaries under the purview of the lieutenant governor.
Also read: Land, Livelihood, Wildlife and Other Worries Surrounding the Creation of New Districts in Ladakh
The amendments also state that no proposal, which requires previous concurrence of the Finance Department with regard to ‘Police’, ‘Public Order’, ‘All India Service’ and ‘Anti-Corruption Bureau’ to exercise the discretion of the lieutenant governor under the Act will be concurred or rejected unless it has been placed before the lieutenant governor through the chief secretary.
As per these Rules, the lieutenant governor would have the authority to decide on grant or refusal of prosecution sanction or filing of an appeal.
The amendments evoked widespread criticism, with Opposition parties, who claimed that they would further disempower the people of Jammu & Kashmir and undermine powers of future elected governments of the Union Territory.