Why is Ayodhya Ram Temple Trust outside the RTI Act as controversy over donation theft escalates? Explained | Today’s news

The Ram Mandir controversy over the alleged misappropriation of donations has intensified amid ongoing investigations and the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust has called a meeting on Monday. The key meeting is expected to be dominated by a discussion on the resignations submitted by the Trust’s general secretary Champat Rai and trustee Anil Mishra.

The controversy has also brought renewed attention to why religious trusts such as the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust are generally exempted from the Right to Information (RTI) Act. CPI(M) Rajya Sabha MP John Brittas on Saturday urged the Center to review its stand, saying bringing the Trust under its purview would enhance transparency and public accountability.

The government classifies such trusts as independent private entities rather than “public bodies” under § 2(a). (h) of the RTI Act, 2005.

Entries about the trusted scheme in the “trust file”

Quick answers to key questions

•5 QUESTIONS

The Trust is classified as an independent, private entity and not a “public authority” under § 2 letter h) of the RTI Act, 2005, which excludes it from the requirements of the Act.

Recent developments include the resignation of Trust officials, a crucial meeting to discuss ongoing investigations and the establishment of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to look into the alleged embezzlement of donations.

MP John Brittas has urged the government to reconsider the Trust’s exemption from the RTI Act, advocating transparency and public accountability in light of the ongoing controversy surrounding the mismanagement of donations.

The CIC found that the Trust was not established or funded by the government and that its creation was in accordance with Supreme Court guidelines, leading to its classification as an independent organisation.

Authorities have launched an investigation and an SIT has been tasked with probing the allegations, which have led to multiple arrests and calls for greater scrutiny of the Trust’s financial practices.

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has placed the government approved plan and related order regarding the establishment of Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust on the ‘confidential file’. In its 2024 order, the Central Information Commission (CIC) upheld the ministry’s refusal to release the documents under the RTI Act, agreeing that their disclosure could pose a risk to those concerned, according to PTI.

The case stemmed from an RTI application filed by Neeraj Sharma seeking “certified copies of the scheme” approved by the Center vide Order No. 71011/02/2019-AY dated February 5, 2020 as mentioned in Notification No. CG-DL-E-05022020-215935 relating to “TerthShrabhoi Ram” along with relevant government orders.

Read also | Ram Mandir donation theft: ‘Sweat that warns kettle black’, criticizes Cong VHP

After Sharma did not receive a satisfactory response from the MHA, she approached the CIC.

During the hearing held on 18 June 2024, the ministry said that “due to the sensitivity of the system and all matters related to it, the entire compilation of documents etc. on the establishment of ‘Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra’ has been kept in a confidential file”.

‘independent trust’

The CIC, in another order issued in June last year, examined whether the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust qualifies as a “public authority” under Section 2(c). h) of the RTI Act.

Read also | Ayodhya Ram Mandir donation theft row: Rely on today’s key meeting

During the proceedings, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) argued that the Trust was an “independent trust”, “not owned, controlled or funded by the Government”. It also claimed that neither the Center nor the Uttar Pradesh government provided any financial assistance to the trust and that “the constitution of the trust was the only role played by the government”, done in accordance with the Supreme Court’s directions.

Read also | Allegations of donation to the Badrinath temple prompted an official investigation

As a representative of the Trust, its counsel similarly argued that it was “neither established nor established by a government notification”, does not receive any direct or indirect government funding and is therefore “not a public authority under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005”.

CIC decision

In its decision, the commission noted that the Trust “was created as per the directions” of the Supreme Court by executing a “trust deed”.

The CIC further stated that the Trust “was neither established nor constituted by any notification of the Government” and that its creation was “an action in accordance with the directions of the Supreme Court which was not initiated suo motu by the Central Government”.

The CIC noted that “in the absence of substantial evidence proving beyond reasonable doubt that the Trust is an entity owned, controlled or substantially funded or that the NGO is largely funded directly or indirectly by funds provided by the relevant government, the Trust cannot be granted public authority status”.

It said the Trust is an “independent organisation” which does not receive any financial support or administrative control from the central or state governments and therefore “will not come under the purview of the RTI Act”.

What did the CPI(M) MP say in his letter to HM Amit Shah?

Meanwhile, in a letter to Union Home Minister Amit Shah dated July 4, Brittas mentioned that the Trust occupies a unique position due to the circumstances surrounding its establishment.

“I respectfully request the Ministry to kindly reconsider its position on the applicability of the Right to Information Act to the Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust, keeping in view the statutory scheme of the Act and the larger constitutional imperative of transparency and public accountability,” Brittas wrote in his letter to the Home Secretary.

Referring to the November 2019 verdict of the Ayodhya High Court, he said the Center had created a scheme for the Trust, established it through a gazette notification and transferred the acquired land to it. He also noted that 12 of the Trust’s 15 members were originally nominated by the government.

Citing the Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board as an example, Brittas said its functioning shows that religious institutions can maintain both autonomy and accountability. He said that bringing the finances and contractual affairs of the Ayodhya Trust under RTI-like transparency “will not dilute its religious autonomy nor interfere with freedom of religion”.

He further emphasized the importance of transparency in institutions that command widespread public trust, saying: “Trusts that enjoy unparalleled public trust must also be held to the highest standards of public transparency and accountability. Brittas also called on the Home Office to submit its revised position to the High Court.”