Has the RTI Act Lost Its Original Purpose?
Context:
The Right to Information (RTI) Act was introduced to enhance transparency, empower citizens, and curb corruption. However, over the years, the effectiveness of the Act has declined due to bureaucratic resistance, judicial interpretations, and policy changes that have diluted its impact.
Relevance:
GS-02 (Indian Polity)
Dimensions of the Article:
- Main Highlights
- What is RTI?
- Features of RTI act
- Significance of RTI
- What is the Issue with RTI?
Main Highlights:
- Erosion of Transparency Mechanisms: The Information Commissions, meant to be the final authority for RTI appeals, are often staffed by retired bureaucrats who are reluctant to enforce transparency. Delays in appointments and case backlogs have further weakened the system.
- Judicial Constraints on RTI: Court rulings, such as CBSE vs Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011) and Girish Ramchandra Deshpande (2012), have limited the scope of RTI by prioritizing administrative efficiency and personal data protection over transparency.
- Legal and Policy Changes: The Digital Personal Data Protection Act and restrictive interpretations of Section 8 of the RTI Act have made it easier for authorities to deny information, undermining the citizens’ right to access public records.
What is RTI?
- The RTI Act was enacted in 2005.
- It recognizes the fundamental right of citizens to access government information.
- It aims to promote transparency, hold public officials accountable, and empower people by granting them the legal right to seek information from public authorities.
Features of RTI act:
- Any citizen of India may request information from a public authority. The required information needs to be replied to within 30 days.
- The request for information is required to be submitted to the Public Information officer at the Centre or in the State.
- It enables every government body to make their offices transparent by computerizing their records for the wide dissemination of the information to the public.
- Jammu and Kashmir will not come under the RTI Act 2005. However, it has a separate 2009 Act.
- The restrictions imposed by the Official Secrets Act 1923 were relaxed by this act.
- Enforcement process:
- The Act has established a three-tier structure for enforcing the right to information guaranteed under the Act they are – Public Information Officer, First Appellate Authority, and Central Information Commission (CIC).
- In case of non-receipt of information within 30 days, the individual requiring information may file an appeal. The Appellate Authority must reply within 30 days or in 45 days in exceptional cases.
- The individual may file 2nd appeal within 90 days in case of non-supply of information.
- The public authorities applicable under the RTI act are all Constitutional bodies at centre and state (Legislature, Executive, Judiciary), bodies/NGOs owned/financed by the government, and privatized public utility companies.
- Section 8: deals with public authorities which have been granted an exemption under this act
- The public authorities excluded under RTI are agencies of the state specified through notification, Central Intelligence and Security Agencies.
- Composition and tenure:
- The Central Information Commission shall consist of one Chief Information Commissioner and up to 10 Central Information Commissioners.
- The Chief Information Commissioner will have a term of five years from the date of entering his office. She/ He shall not be entitled to reappointment to that post.
Significance of RTI:
- It strengthens participatory democracy as it empowers people to demand and get the information they intend to.
- It keeps the government records always open to public scrutiny. For instance, the recent electoral bond case was filed with a pretext of a RTI filed seeking information of the source and destination of the huge corpus of money.
- It keeps the checks and balances of the offices under the government and ensures that they change their attitude towards the duty they are bound to perform.
What is the Issue with RTI?
- Resistance from Bureaucracy: Many Information Commissioners are reluctant to impose penalties, leading to a lack of accountability.
- Judicial Interpretations: Court judgments have limited access to information by expanding the definition of ‘personal information’ and prioritizing administrative convenience.
- Policy Dilution: Legislative changes, such as amendments through the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, have made it easier for authorities to reject RTI requests.
Way forward:
- Strengthening Information Commissions: Appoint qualified individuals with a strong background in transparency and set time-bound mandates for case disposal.
- Clear and Citizen-Centric Legal Interpretation: Courts must uphold the intent of the RTI Act and ensure exemptions are applied strictly.
- Public and Media Advocacy: Citizens and the media must actively discuss and defend RTI to prevent further dilution of their fundamental right to information.
Related Posts
Drying Up of Rivers
Posted on
