Selected Orders of the Right to Information Commission of Sri Lanka (2017- 2018) February 2019 Selected Orders of the Right to Information Commission of Sri Lanka (2017- 2018) With Extraction of Keywords and Index of Orders A Publication of the RTI Commission of Sri Lanka Selected Orders of the Right to Information Commission of Sri Lanka (2017- 2018) @RTI Commission All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without prior permission of the Right to Information Commission of Sri Lanka. ISBN Print The Right to Information Commission of Sri Lanka (RTIC) is responsible for the contents of this publication. Published by: RTI Commission of Sri Lanka Rooms 203-205, BMICH, Colombo 7, Sri Lanka Tel/Fax: + 94 11 2691625/26 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.rticommission.lk Printed By: Siyatha Media Networks (Pvt Ltd) Nugegoda TABLE OF CONTENTS I. List of Abbreviations i II. Foreword by former Chief Information Commissioner (2005-2010) India Wajahat Habibullah iii III. Preface - Right to Information Commission, Sri Lanka v IV. Extracts of Orders with Keywords 1. Airline Pilots Guild of Sri Lanka v. Sri Lankan Airlines Ltd 1 RTIC/99/2017 2. B. A. J. Indrathilaka v. Visakha Vidyalaya/ Ministry of Education 11 RTIC/63/2018 3. Basheer Segudawood v. Presidential Secretariat 14 RTIC/22/2017 4. Ceylon Bank Employees‟ Union v People‟s Bank 17 RTIC/58/2018 5. Dialog Axiata v. Telecommunications Regulatory Commission of Sri Lanka 27 RTIC/09/2018 6. Dilangani Niroshika v. Bogambara Prison 30 RTIC/228/2018 7. Feizal Samath v. Sri Lankan Bureau of Foreign Employment 32 RTIC/201/2017 8. G. Dileep Amuthan v. Ministry of Defence 34 RTIC/ 70/2018 9. G. Dileep Amuthan v. Northern Provincial Council 41 RTIC/21/2017 10. H.C.S. de Zoysa Siriwardena v. Sri Lanka Army 44 RTIC/89/2017 11. Kumarasiri Manage v Secretary, Ministry of Education 47 RTIC/65/2017 12. L.D.N. Kumarasiri v Mahanama College, Colombo/ Ministry of Education 51 RTIC/44/2017 13. Mario Gomez v Ministry of Social Empowerment, Welfare and Kandyan 53 Heritage RTIC/51/2018 14. O.W.K. Gnanadasa v. Bank of Ceylon 55 RTIC/131/2017 15. P. U. Rangabandara v. The Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka 57 RTIC/55/2017 16. Premalal Abeysekere v. Ministry of Education 61 RTIC/25/2017 17. Purujoththaman Thangamayl v. National Water Supply & Drainage Board 64 RTIC/78/2017 18. Raisa Wickrematunga v. Telecommunications Regulatory Commission of Sri 66 Lanka RTIC/106/2018 19. Shreen Saroor v. Prime Minister‟s Office 69 RTIC/1/2018 20. Transparency International Sri Lanka v. Presidential Secretariat 72 RTIC/6/2017 21. Tharindu Jayawardena v Bureau of the Commissioner-General of 99 Rehabilitation RTIC/119/2017 22. Thilak Ranjith Silva v. Sri Lanka Police-Headquarters 102 RTIC/142/2018 23. V. Y. Sabaratnam v. Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation Ltd. 105 RTIC/117/2018 24. Verite Research (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Central Bank of Sri Lanka 108 RTIC/ 26/2018 V. Note on the RTI Commission 119 VI. Table of References 120 VII. Index of Selected RTIC Decisions 123 VIII. Annexures Right To Information Act No 12 of 2016 Rules On Fees and Appeal Procedure of the Sri Lanka RTI Commission, February 3rd 2017 Directives & Guidances on Pro-Active Disclosure under Sections 8 and 9 of the RTI Act, Sri Lanka LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CBEU- Ceylon Bank Employees‟ Union CBSL- Central Bank of Sri Lanka CCO- Chief Commercial Officer CEO- Chief Executive Officer CIC- Central Information Commission CID- Criminal Investigation Department COI- Commission of Inquiry DALL- Declaration of Assets and Liabilities Law No. 1 of 1975 DG- Director General DO- Designated Officer EIA- Environmental Impact Assessment EMP- Environmental Management Plan EPF- Employees‟ Provident Fund FAC- Frequency Allocation Committee FOI- Freedom of Information FOIA- Freedom of Information Act GoSL- Government of Sri Lanka HHR- Head of Human Resources HQ- Head-Quarter IO- Information Officer ISIN- International Securities Identification Number ISP- Internet Service Provider LKR- Sri Lankan Rupee LTTE- Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam MASL- Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka i MHz- Megahertz MOU- Memorandum of Understanding NIC- National Identity Card NWSDB- National Water Supply and Drainage Board PA- Public Authority PCOI- Presidential Commission of Inquiry PIA- Pakistan International Airlines PMO- Prime Minister‟s Office PUCL- People‟s Union for Civil Liberties RTI- Right to Information RTIC- Right to Information Commission SC(FR)- Supreme Court Fundamental Rights SCM- Supreme Court Minutes SD- Special Determination SLA- Sri Lanka Army SLR- Sri Lanka Law Reports SLTA- Sri Lanka Telecommunications Act TISL- Transparency International Sri LAnka TRC- Telecommunications Regulatory Commission TRCSL- Telecommunications Regulatory Commission of Sri Lanka UN HRC- United Nations Human Rights Council UN- United Nations UOI- Union of India WTO- World Trade Organization ii FOREWORD It is universally accepted that the essence of government in a democracy must be transparency with every organ of government; executive, judiciary and legislature being answerable to the citizen. Hence Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, looked upon by Indians as the father of their Nation, when describing his vision of self-governance (Swaraj) for India, described it as follows: “The real Swaraj will come not by the acquisition of authority by a few but by the acquisition of capacity by all to resist authority when abused” India‟s Right to Information Act, 2005 therefore declares that democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information which are vital to its functioning, and also to contain corruption and to hold Governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed. And this is a universal truth of particular relevance to South Asia, the governments of which countries have remained committed to eliminating poverty, the detritus of colonial rule. Since the closing decades of the last century, when Australia, New Zealand and Canada enacted laws for freedom of information, this is now becoming, apart from free and fair elections, a definition of the very concept of democracy and a hallmark of our Commonwealth. By 1999, the Commonwealth Law Ministers recognised disclosure with limited and narrowly drawn exceptions as key elements of democratic governance - the preservation and maintenance of records and subjecting information access disputes to an independent review process – became a minimum for freedom of information (FOI) laws in the Commonwealth. Later the Commonwealth Secretariat commissioned a model FOI law drawing from best global practices. There can, of course be no single model that suits all and this draft was no exception Yet it succeeded in generating public discussion on creating a consciousness of the need for such laws, in face of the resistance of governments to adopting such openness; and donor agencies seeking to foist such laws upon countries with weak economies as governance reform measures In India, beset with unacceptable levels of poverty and heavy government investment in poverty alleviation, the demand originated with vociferous articulation at the rural community level in the state of Rajasthan. Unfortunately the lack of such demand for an FOI law coming from the community is also the most visible cause of slow progress made towards the adoption of FOI laws in several other countries, and where such laws have indeed been adopted, the lack of effective enforcement. For example, in countries like Pakistan, Nepal, Sierra Leone, Tanzania and Kenya, only a handful of organisations and activists strive boldly to keep the demand for FOI laws alive in the great cities iii while community based groups in semi urban and rural areas struggle with the effects of opaque decision-making processes, unable to use or invoke such laws in their work. The principal challenge continues to be that Governments have looked upon FOI laws as an irritating intrusion in their established routine, oblivious of their potential as agents of promoting good governance. This is exacerbated by donors or demands of the media to expose malfeasance but, in the view of such government agencies, impeding their ambitious plans for socio-economic development that must, in their view, take precedence over all other concerns. Civil society and the media, on the other hand often suspect governments‟ equivocation on the subject as indicative of the desire of politicians and bureaucrats to conceal financial misdeeds. This clash of interests obscures the basic principle that FOI laws have a direct bearing on the deepening of democracy, namely, in empowering the people to participate with government in the crafting of a shared vision of socio-economic development and cooperating in the application of such plans. Sri Lanka‟s RTI law places emphasis on the importance of making it possible for the poorest and most deprived to get government-held information – information which can make the difference between life and death. As so eloquently advocated by former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, “The great democratizing power of information has given us all the chance to effect change and alleviate poverty in ways we cannot even imagine today... With information on our side, with knowledge of a potential for all, the path to poverty can be reversed.” But engendering a regime of transparency is not as simple as enacting an FOI law that matches up with international standards For this, civil society must take the lead, working with government to keep it accountable constantly generating the feedback that will make governance truly participatory. It is now universally accepted that the essence of government in a democracy must be transparency with every organ of government; executive, judiciary and legislature being answerable to the citizen. Governance, then, must comprise not only delivery of services, but of security of life and property, both of which are predicated on security of the nation, as conceived not by the security forces or the bureaucracy, but by the people.