Still waiting

Multiple RTI applications to the MoD, the MEA, and the PMO have elicited little new information on the Rafale deal

Wikipedia describes Rafale as a “gust of wind’’ and “burst of fire” in a military sense. The French fighter aircraft built by Dassault Aviation, now a burning subject being heard by the Supreme Court, is also hot in the RTI (right to information) circuit (without much success though). This reporter too tried seeking information from the government on the process involved in ordering 36 fighter jets, down from 126 proposed earlier. 

Since the narrative was around who took the call of finalising the deal at 36 jets and why, whether it was actually done hurriedly to add weight to the Prime Minister’s visit to France in 2015, and if the Ministry of External Affairs had a greater say than the Ministry of Defence in the matter, filing multiple RTI applications seemed like a good idea. With the online process making it so much simpler than before, applications were sent to the Ministry of Defence, Ministry of External Affairs, and the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) on September 25, and one waited for reply at least from one of them.

Just when the Rafale RTI was fading from memory with so much more current occupying the news pages and news rooms from government-Reserve Bank of India (RBI) faceoff to almost a midnight coup at the headquarters of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), a speed post letter in white envelope landed up at the desk. It was from the defence ministry. For some reason, online RTI applications get both physical and online answers. Tearing the envelope open clumsily to see the content did not spring any surprise. It was a one-page letter, directing the RTI application to the Air headquarters (Vayu Bhavan, New Delhi) “for taking appropriate action and furnishing requisite information to the applicant directly as per the provisions of the RTI Act’’. The Air Acquisition (Capital) wing is the right forum to seek this information, the defence ministry letter indicated. This was signed on October 15 and delivered soon by post. 

Since there was an email too, inviting the applicant to look online for the reply, the hope was that the online version may just have something more than the speed post letter. All hopes dashed, one waited for the next response from another government department that had received a similar request for information on the process of finalising the Rafale deal.

A few days later, on October 23 to be precise, another white envelope arrived. This time the envelope was bigger and, more important, bulkier. It turned out that the PMO’s response to the RTI was a two-page document, if you can call it that. While the first page was a cover letter, the second had the “approved inputs’’ from the PMO. In eight lines and two paragraphs, the highest office in the government said the information sought was “exempted for disclosure under the Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act, 2005’’ because of the strategic and security aspects involved. The reply went on to add “notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen information, disclosure of which prejudicially affect sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific, or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence.” In the online version, the PMO said the request had been disposed of as on October 23. 

The information sought from the PMO and ministries of defence and external affairs revolved around the input given by each of them, including written comments/noting by the Indian government authorities, for striking the Rafale deal for 36 fighter jets in 2015. The thrust of the RTI applications to multiple authorities was to understand the decision making process that went into the Rafale deal and also the reason for reducing the number of jets from 126 to 36. 

The Ministry of External Affairs, meanwhile, has not responded on the Rafale deal even after the mandatory one-month period is over from the date of application. It may or may not have had anything to do with the Rafale deal, but there’s hope still for yet another white envelope. Never mind if it’s slimmer or bulkier than the rest.

PS: The day this column was published, another envelope—RTI reply from the Ministry of External Affairs on the Rafale deal-- arrived. This was brown and not white, for a change. While the online RTI status showed "pending" till the time of writing the column on October 31, the speed post letter that reached me on November 1, was dated October 18 and it was posted on October 25. Intriguing indeed. MEA (Europe West Division), in its reply, said, "the subject matter (that's Rafale deal) is being dealt by the Ministry of Defence".  Why then did the Ministry of Defence forward the Rafale RTI to the Air  headquarters, without offering any reply? The Supreme Court hearing on the deal after 10 days may unravel certain things. Only if we get to know what's in the sealed envelopes that the court has asked for.