The
Central Act specifically permits the employment
of staff as may be necessary to discharge the Commission's duties.
The staffing model for each Information Commission will need to
reflect the decisions finally made about the set up of the Information
Commission - ie. Whether there will be regional offices? How Information
Commissioners will make decisions - independently or together? Whether
staff will be delegated research and/or investigation and/or decision-making
powers (at least in simple cases)?
In accordance with international best practice, consideration may
be given to employing more staff to do support work for the Commissioners,
which could cut down their workload and leave them to do only the
key decision-making. This could improve efficiency while minimising
costs. This is what happens in the United Kingdom and Canada, for
example, where Information Commissioners delegate many investigatory
and decision-making powers. Note also that the Indian Information
Commissions are also responsible for monitoring
implementation, which means that staff will need to be allocated
to this task as well.
Consideration should also be given to where staff will be drawn
from, specifically, whether staff will all be seconded from the
public service or whether the Information Commissions can recruit
specialist staff with particularly useful skills from outside the
public service. For maximum efficiency - particularly in the early
days - it would be useful if staff with relevant experience and
expertise could be recruited from outside the public service who
would have the capacity to start work immediately. This would reduce
the amount of training necessary for Commission staff and would
also strengthen the (perceived) independence of the Commission.
The approach to staffing should be flexible, to ensure maximum access
by the public, timely disposal of appeals and to keep costs within
budget.
|