The same welcome must also go out to the putting up at the website the draft rules framed under the IT Act for discussion. Other government departments and regulators would do well to emulate his example, as it will make for informed discussion and transparency. In fact, that is precisely what is being done, with most states having taken e-governance initiatives, particularly after Chandrababu Naidu's spectacular public relations success in this regard.
But the end of e-governance is not just more convenience. Far more has been claimed for it, with the visions ranging from the end of corruption to a broader, more participatory democracy. It is these grander ambitions which may come to nought. That's because too heavy a burden of expectations has been put on the new technology. After all, it is not technology which begets change but the men who wield that technology. Unfortunately, it is the very same officials who use their privileged access to information to garner power and pelf who will also determine the way the new technology is going to be used. There lies the rub. A particularly disquieting confirmation of these tendencies is evident from the way the Freedom of Information Bill has been emasculated.
The truth is that technology can promise much, but the question remains""will that promise be used? There is a story of the wireless pioneer, Marconi, who, when told by his associates that his new technology meant that he could now "talk to Florida" asked "and do we have anything to say to Florida?" It is useful to remember the tall claims that accompanied the introduction of television, the hype about how it would bring about a revolution in education and public awareness. The truth is that technology can only be developed and applied in accordance with the social context from which it is derived. If the government is indeed serious about e-governance, it should ensure good governance, and the new technology will ensure that it has an "e" before it.
