RIGHT TO INFORMATION
1. Introduction
The government
proposed amendments to the RTI Act (2005) affecting salaries and tenure of
Information Commissioners.
Critics argue this
affects independence and neutrality of the transparency regime.
2. Historical Background
Ø
International Context:
Ø
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(1948): Everyone has the right to seek and receive information.
Ø
International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (1966): Guarantees freedom to seek and impart information.
Ø
Indian Context:
Ø
Indian Context:
Ø
Supreme Court (1986) in Kulwal v/s Jaipur
Municipal Corporation ruled that Article 19(1)(a) – Freedom of Speech
and Expression – includes RTI.
Thomas Jefferson: “Information is the currency
of democracy.”
3. Objectives of
RTI Act
Ø
Empower citizens to hold government
accountable.
Ø
Promote transparency and accountability in
governance.
Ø
Contain corruption by making government
actions visible.
Enhance participation in democratic processes.
4. Reasons for
Adoption
Ø
Rampant corruption and scandals (e.g., 2G, CWG).
Ø
International pressure and global activism.
Modernization and development of
an information society.
5. Key Features of RTI Act
|
Feature |
Details |
|
Applicability |
Extends to whole of India except Jammu & |
|
Definition of Information |
Section 2(f): Any material in any |
|
Right to Information |
Section 2(j): Includes inspection, copies, extracts, |
|
Public Authority |
Any body constituted by Constitution, law, or |
|
Section 4 |
Requires suo motu disclosure of information |
|
Section 8 & 8(2) |
Lists exemptions; allows disclosure if public |
|
Information Officers |
Public Information Officer (PIO) and Assistant PIO |
|
Time Limits |
30 days for general info; 48 hours if life/liberty at |
6.
Importance of RTI
Ø Empowers citizens and reduces secrecy in administration.
Ø Strengthens participatory democracy by enabling public scrutiny of
government actions.
Ø Exposed major corruption scandals, e.g., 2G spectrum, coal block
allocations, CWG.
7. Challenges in Implementation
Misuse of RTI: Requests without public
interest; vindictive filings.
Limited awareness: Illiteracy and lack of
knowledge hinder utilization.
Insufficient authority: Information
Commissioners often cannot enforce compliance.
Poor infrastructure: Lack of staff,
record-keeping, and technology support.
Conflict with other laws: Indian Evidence Act,
Official Secrets Act, Atomic Energy Act, Central Civil Services Rules.
8. RTI vs Other Legal Provisions
|
Law / Concept |
Relation with RTI |
|
Official Secrets Act (1923) |
RTI overrides OSA; Section 22 ensures RTI prevails; |
|
Right to Privacy |
Conceptually complementary but sometimes conflicting; |
|
Political Parties |
Not considered public authorities (except donations |
9. Recent Amendments
RTI Amendment Bill 2013: Removed political
parties from public authority definition.
Draft 2017: Allowed closure of case if
applicant dies; potential threat to whistleblowers.
Proposed 2018 Amendment: Government can fix
salaries/tenure of Information Commissioners, affecting independence of
CIC.
10. Other Issues
Limited powers to enforce RTI orders.
Non-compliance with compensation awarded to
applicants.
Dilution of Whistleblower Protection Act.
Mismanagement and poor infrastructure in
Information Commissions.
11. Conclusion
RTI is crucial for transparency,
accountability, and social justice, but implementation challenges and
amendments have weakened its autonomy.
Effective governance requires:
Ø Strengthening RTI with whistleblower protection.
Ø Decentralization of authority.
Ø Ensuring compliance and enforcement at all levels.
RTI is a tool for citizen empowerment, but not
sufficient alone; needs complementary reforms.
Leave a Reply