No liability on ED to disclose names of people in Panama Papers: CIC

Introduction:

The Central Information Commission (CIC) recently in an appeal filed by Durga Prasad Chaudhary that the Enforcement Directorate can withhold names of tax evaders and the other information relating to Panama Papers and disclosures related to that cannot be made under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Panama Papers were leaked by an anonymous source in 2015 which contained financial and attorney-client information of many offshore entities. These papers are the documents which were created by Panamanian law firm and corporate service provider Mossack Fonseca. It was also alleged that these papers contained details of many Indian black money hoarders.

Facts:

The appellant through the RTI had requested a list of names of people named in the Panama Papers along with their other complete details and the details of the officers who were responsible for the delay in investigation. This request for information was turned down by the ED which had claimed an exemption under Section 24 (which states that the act shall not apply to intelligence and security organizations) read with Second Schedule of the RTI Act. The same decision was upheld by the First Appellate Authority.

Contentions:

The respondent side relied on the Delhi High Court judgment in Directorate of Enforcement v Mr. Bimal Kumar Bhattacharya wherein it was held that Section 24 expressly excludes the intelligence and security organizations from the act. Another case of Intelligence Bureau v Sanjiv Chaturvedi was submitted by the respondent side wherein it was held that the organization specified in the Second Schedule of the Act were clearly excluded from the act.

Held:

The commission referred to the Supreme Court judgment of Khanapuram Gandaiah v Administrative Officer and Others where it was held that under Section 6 of the RTI Act, an applicant can only get the information which can be accessed by the ‘public authority’ and the answers sought should have been with the public authority. If they are not, then the authority is not obliged to give any reasons of not giving the information.

Conclusion:

Thus, the Commission citing all the cases and submissions held that ED cannot be forced to divulge and information about the people on the Panama Papers because of the exemption provided in the act. This is a much-appreciated judgment because sanctity of some authorities should be maintained otherwise it might lead to many problems for the nation as a whole. Some information has to be protected under the act.

-by Amrashaa Singh,

Reporter, INBA

Category: information