Print

Comment

Email

Digg

Del.icio.us

Reddit

Twitter

A Rs 854 crore five years plan to computerize Indian judiciary was announced by the Prime Minister in October 2005. One of the objectives of the plan was to create 2,500 computer rooms and provide 15,000 judicial officers with laptops. The plan was actively supported by the then Chief Justice of India, Justice RC Lahoti. For this, a team including IT experts was to be put together, under the leadership of Justice GC Bharuka.

The announcement was made almost two years back. And, it was from the two most important people of Indiathe Prime Minister and the Chief Justice of India. As the announcement was regarding major reforms in the Indian judiciary, it was a very serious matter concerning millions of citizens.

It is now 2007, almost two years ever since the announcement was made. And, thanks to the Public Information Office (PIO) department, now there in most government offices, many of us feel nothing much has happened on this mega plan to computerize the judiciary. This sense of "no progress" is primarily arising because the PIOs are not geared up for the job they are supposed to do. When a concerned citizen approaches the PIO for information on any matter, the PIO has no useful information to offer.

For instance, take this case of computerization of Indian judiciary. When a request to furnish information on National Policy and Action Plan on computerization of judiciary, the under Right to Information Act, was sent to the PIO in the Ministry of Law and Justice, the response was "the details of implementation of the plan are still being worked out. That being so, it is not possible to give any information in the matter at this stage."

Lets not forget, many of these citizens are active stakeholders in bringing in e-Governance in the country. These concerned and well-intentioned citizens, and the media can interpret such responses as a stalling technique by the government, and accuse it of resisting transparency and accountability. This will only generate mistrust, confusion, and bad press.

The idea behind the PIO is surely good and honorable, but incomplete information makes it meaningless. Slow moving e-Governance projects are seen as a repeat of the typical government gimmickannouncements being made or foundation stones being laid, press coverage widely made, and then forgotten.

It is therefore important that the PIO is not just a post office passing information from party to another, but actually gives meaningful information. The PIO should have information not just about an e-Governance project, but its charter, timelines, milestones, and names of departments and officers responsible for completing the tasks.

Obviously, the PIO can provide information only if the e-Governance project managers are organized on these lines. Further, according to sources, agencies like the World Bank, are unhappy in this regard. Its been repeatedly asking the government to provide an action plan for the expenditure.

It is time the PIO gets more demanding, and the e-Governance project managers get more organized. I believe this will help in better internal tracking of projects.

The author is Group Editor of Dataquest. ibrahima@cybermedia.co.in

Page(s)   1