The Right to Information Commission (RTIC) has directed the Secretary General of Parliament to release the names of MPs who have submitted Declarations of Assets and Liabilities during 2010-2018. This followed a journalist, Chamara Sampath filing a request for that information under the RTI law and the refusal by the Secretary General on the basis [...]

News

Parliament asked to handover list of MPs’ Assets Declarations

SG says list with Speaker, he has no access to it
View(s):

The Right to Information Commission (RTIC) has directed the Secretary General of Parliament to release the names of MPs who have submitted Declarations of Assets and Liabilities during 2010-2018.

This followed a journalist, Chamara Sampath filing a request for that information under the RTI law and the refusal by the Secretary General on the basis that Declarations of Assets are filed by MPs to the Speaker of Parliamentand that he does not have access to that confidential information and also, that the request infringed the privileges of Parliament.

On appeal by the journalist to the RTIC, the refusal of the Secretary General was set aside on the basis that a list of names of MPs who have filed Declarations of Assets during a particular period, does not amount to personal information or information that infringes parliamentary privilege that may be withheld under the RTI Act

The 27 page Order signed by Chair Mahinda Gammampila, Commissioners Kishali Pinto-Jayawardena, Justice Rohini Walgama and S.G. Punchihewa observed that if the Parliament’s argument is to prevail, it would in essence be to deem the fact of whether or not an MP has adhered to the law, as information kept out of reach of the RTI Act. This would defeat the entire purpose of the Act, they said. That was also unacceptable as an MP, by taking on a public role, has accepted a higher level of public scrutiny. The requested information would provide crucial insight into compliance with existing law by MPs who hold elected office and are financed by public funds. As such there is overriding public interest in the disclosure of the information, the RTIC held.

It was also ruled that, the Sri Lanka Parliament was the institutional entity named as the Public Authority under the RTI Act and that, internal administrative divisions within that entity, (between the Speaker and the Secretary General), had no relevance to the legal question as to the information being in the hands of the Parliament. In any event, the Secretary General, being the ‘administrative arm’ of Parliament, had ‘institutional possession’ of the lists of names of MPs who had complied with the statutory duty to file Declarations of Assets and Liabilities.

The RTIC also observed that it was puzzling as to why ‘such a high degree of secrecy’ needed to be maintained about this data.

Following the handing down of this decision on Tuesday, either party has the right of appeal to the Court of Appeal within one month.

Share This Post

WhatsappDeliciousDiggGoogleStumbleuponRedditTechnoratiYahooBloggerMyspaceRSS

Advertising Rates

Please contact the advertising office on 011 - 2479521 for the advertising rates.