This editorial draws on the article “Scuttling people’s right to information” from The Hindu, published on October 14, 2024.
It highlights the systematic weakening of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, primarily through government inaction, biased appointments, and recent legal amendments. The editorial stresses the importance of addressing these challenges to maintain transparency and accountability in governance.
Key Focus Areas for Prelims:
- Laws: Right to Information (RTI) Act of 2005, Digital Personal Data Protection Act of 2023
- Judicial Landmarks: State of U.P. v. Raj Narain (1975)
- Relevant Acts: Whistleblowers Protection Act, Freedom of Information Act
- Key Bodies: Central Information Commission, Common Service Centres
Key Focus Areas for Mains:
- The evolution and impact of the RTI Act in India
- Issues that weaken the effectiveness of the RTI Act
The Right to Information Act: A Cornerstone of Indian Democracy
Since its enactment in 2005, the Right to Information (RTI) Act has been a critical tool for ensuring transparency in governance in India. It has empowered ordinary citizens to expose corruption, demand accountability, and bring to light hidden truths—whether in everyday matters like the delivery of public services or more complex issues such as the opacity around electoral bonds. However, over time, the RTI Act’s effectiveness has been progressively weakened through delays in appointing Information Commissioners, biased selections favoring politically connected individuals, and legislative changes that have reduced its power. As the law nears its 20th anniversary, there is an urgent need to address these issues to preserve its core principles of transparency and accountability.
The Evolution of the Right to Information in India
- 1975-1977: The Transparency Movement Begins
During the Emergency period in India (1975–77), when civil liberties were suspended, the importance of government accountability became clear. Activists and intellectuals initiated discussions on the public’s right to access information, although no legislative actions were taken at the time. These experiences sowed the seeds for future efforts to institutionalize transparency in governance. - 1975: Supreme Court Recognizes Right to Information
In State of U.P. v. Raj Narain (1975), the Supreme Court of India declared that the Right to Information is embedded within the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. This precedent was further strengthened in 1981’s P. Gupta vs. Union of India, where the Court affirmed that open governance is a constitutional principle, and information disclosure should be the norm, with secrecy being the exception. - 1990: The Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) Movement
The MKSS, a grassroots organization based in Rajasthan, started advocating for the right to access local government records. Through innovative methods like “Jan Sunwai” (public hearings), they exposed corruption in public works projects, galvanizing nationwide support for transparency. Their efforts laid the foundation for RTI campaigns across India, demonstrating the power of information in curbing corruption. - 1997-2001: Early State-level RTI Laws
During this period, several Indian states enacted their own Right to Information laws. Tamil Nadu and Goa passed such legislation in 1997, followed by Rajasthan and Karnataka in 2000, and Delhi in 2001. These state laws acted as precursors to the national RTI law, with Maharashtra’s 2002 RTI Act being particularly comprehensive. The success of these state laws reflected the growing public demand for transparency and provided valuable lessons for a national law. - 2002: The Incomplete Freedom of Information Act
The central government passed the Freedom of Information Act in 2002, but it was never implemented due to its weak provisions and numerous exemptions. Its failure underscored the need for a more robust national Right to Information law that would genuinely empower citizens. - 2005: The Enactment of the Right to Information Act
In October 2005, the Right to Information Act was passed, ushering in a new era of transparency. It mandated timely responses to public requests for information from government bodies, established Information Commissions at both the central and state levels, and outlined penalties for non-compliance. The Act covered all levels of government and included provisions for private entities substantially funded by the state. At the time, it was considered one of the most progressive transparency laws in the world. - 2006-2010: Early Impact of the RTI Act
The initial years saw a significant surge in Right to Information (RTI) applications, with citizens using the law to expose cases of corruption, such as the Adarsh Housing Society scam and irregularities in the 2G spectrum allocation. However, resistance from the bureaucracy and growing backlogs in Information Commissions emerged as notable challenges.
- 2011-2019: Judicial Interventions and Expansions
The Supreme Court issued several landmark judgments during this period, further strengthening the Right to Information (RTI) Act. One ruling in 2013 declared political parties to be public authorities under the Right to Information (RTI), though its implementation faced strong resistance. On the darker side, the assassination of RTI activists like Shehla Masood in 2011 raised concerns about the safety of information seekers.
- 2019: Amendments to the RTI Act
The Right to Information (RTI) Amendment Act of 2019 changed the tenure of the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) and Information Commissioners (ICs) from 5 years to 3, subject to central government discretion. It also allowed the central government to set their salaries and removed pension deductions for prior government service.
- 2023: The Digital Personal Data Protection Act
The 2023 amendments further diluted the Right to Information (RTI) Act by exempting all personal information from disclosure, removing exceptions that allowed for its release when public interest outweighed privacy concerns. This marked a significant stea. p back for transparency.
Challenges Undermining the RTI Act’s Effectiveness
- Understaffed and Defunct Information Commissions
Many state information commissions are either non-functional or severely understaffed, leading to a massive backlog of appeals and complaints. In a 2023-24 report from the Satark Nagrik Sangathan, seven of the 29 commissions were defunct for varying periods. Some, like Jharkhand’s, have been non-functional for over four years. The Central Information Commission has eight out of 11 posts vacant, and more than 4 lakh appeals remain pending nationwide. In states like Chhattisgarh and Bihar, it is estimated that fresh appeals may not be addressed before 2029.
1. Legislative Weakening of the RTI Act
Amendments passed in 2019 and 2023 have diluted the Right to Information (RTI) Act’s effectiveness. The 2019 amendment shifted control of Information Commissioners’ tenures and salaries to the central government, compromising their autonomy. The 2023 Digital Personal Data Protection Act further weakened the RTI Act by expanding exemptions for personal information, making it easier for authorities to deny information requests.
2. Lack of Penalties for Non-Compliance
Information Commissions are frequently failing to penalize officials who violate the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The Satark Nagrik Sangathan report noted that penalties were not imposed in 95% of the cases where they could have been. This lack of enforcement fosters a culture of impunity, where public officials feel free to delay or deny information without facing consequences.
3. Political Appointments and Lack of Diversity in Information Commissions
The appointment of Information Commissioners is often politically motivated, with many commissioners being retired bureaucrats or individuals with political ties. This lack of diversity undermines the independence of the commissions and can lead to biased decision-making. Furthermore, only 9% of all commissioners since the Act’s inception have been women, highlighting a gender gap.
4. Threats and Violence Against RTI Activists
Right to Information (RTI) activists face significant dangers, including threats, harassment, and even assassination. According to Transparency International India, nearly 100 people have been killed for filing RTI requests, while thousands have been assaulted or faced false charges. The Whistleblowers Protection Act, passed in 2014 to safeguard RTI users, remains largely unimplemented.
5. Increasing Use of Exemption Clauses
Authorities are increasingly relying on exemption clauses in the RTI Act to deny information. For instance, Section 8(1)(a) related to national security and Section 8(1)(d) concerning commercial confidence are often invoked to withhold information. In 2023, the government cited these exemptions to refuse information regarding the PM CARES Fund.
6. Technological Challenges and the Digital Divide
Although digitalization has streamlined certain processes, it has also created barriers for those without internet access or digital literacy. According to a 2023 IAMAI-Kantar study, 45% of India’s population (approximately 665 million people) does not have access to the internet. This digital divide limits the reach and effectiveness of online RTI filing systems.
Measures to Strengthen the Right to Information (RTI) Act
- Streamline Appointment Processes:
Implement a transparent, time-bound process for appointing Information Commissioners, ensuring vacancies are filled within 30 days. An independent selection committee comprising opposition leaders, civil society representatives, and legal experts can ensure impartiality and diversity. - Improve Digital Infrastructure:
Use artificial intelligence to streamline Right to Information (RTI) applications and set up RTI kiosks in rural areas. Mobile Right to Information (RTI) services and Common Service Centres can bridge the digital divide and improve access for citizens without internet. - Strengthen Penalties for Non-Compliance:
Introduce stricter penalties for officials who fail to provide timely information or violate the law. Information Commissioners should be required to impose penalties in cases where the Right to Information (RTI) Act has been breached, following clearly defined guidelines. - Ensure Whistleblower Protection:
Fully implement the Whistleblowers Protection Act and provide a dedicated helpline for RTI activists facing threats. The Act should also be amended to cover public servants who wish to expose corruption within their departments. - Address Gender Disparity:
Implement a reservation system within the appointment process to ensure better gender representation among Information Commissioners. This can help bring more diverse perspectives into the decision-making process. - Reduce Reliance on Exemptions:
Mandate that information withheld under exemption clauses be subject to annual review. Authorities should have to demonstrate that the reasons for withholding information remain valid, with an independent body overseeing the process.
Explore our Books: https://apnipathshala.com/product-category/books/
Explore Our test Series: https://tests.apnipathshala.com/
