Right to Information – RTI

The Right to information is in the news regarding the amendments recently passed by the Parliament. The amendments have become been criticised by activists on grounds that it will affect independence and neutrality of the transparency panel.

Mr Kulwal v/s Jaipur Municipal Corporation case, 1986

Supreme Court directed that freedom of speech and expression provided under Article 19 of the Constitution clearly implies Right to Information, as without information the freedom of speech and expression cannot be fully used by the citizens.

Read RTI Act and the Judiciary

Right to Information Act, 2005

The right to information act was passed by the Parliament to empower the citizens and enhance their role in the democracy. It seeks to promote transparency and accountability in governance as well as fight rampant corruption.

Provisions of the Act

    • It defines “Information” as any material in any form, including Records, Documents, Memos, e-mails, Opinions, Advices, Press releases, Circulars, Orders, Logbooks, Contracts, Reports, Papers, Samples, Models, Data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a Public Authority under any other law for the time being in force.
    • “Right to Information” according to the Act is the right to information held by any public authority and includes the right to:
      • Inspection of work, documents, records;
      • Taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records;
      • Taking certified samples of material;
      • Obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts.

      “Public authority” is defined as any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted

      • by the Constitution;
      • by any other statute by Parliament/State Legislature;
      • by Government notification or order, and includes any—
        • body owned, controlled or substantially financed;
        • non-Government organisation substantially financed, directly or indirectly funded by the Government.

      The Act also requires suo motu disclosure of information by public authorities.

    • Information Commissioners
    • The Act provides for the appointment of Central as well as State Information Commissioners. Public authorities have designated Public Information Officers made responsible to give information to a person who seeks information under the RTI Act.
  • Time limits
    • The Act mandates that the information sought should be provided within 30 days of the receipt of the application; and within 48 hours if it concerns the life or liberty of a person.
    • However, an extra 5 days maybe added if the request has been made through the Assistant Public Information Officer or it is sent to a wrong public authority.
  • Exemptions and Conflicts
    • The Act also provides for exemptions against furnishing information including that under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 if larger public interest is served.
    • Indian Evidence Act, Atomic Energy Act, 1912, Central Civil Services Act, Official Secrets Act, 1923 have provisions for non-disclosure of information.
  • However, the RTI Act says that if there is a conflict between the two laws, the provisions of the RTI Act override those of the Official Secrets Act.

Read Also Government of India Act of 1919

The Right to Information (Amendment) Bill, 2019

It seeks to amend the Right to Information Act, 2005.  Key features of the Bill include:

Term of Information Commissioners: 

  • Under the Act, Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) and Information Commissioners (ICs) appointed to implement the provisions of the Act, will hold office for a term of five years. 
  • The Bill removes this provision and states that the central government will notify the term of office for the CIC and the ICs.

Determination of salary: 

    • The Act states that the salary of the CIC and ICs will be equivalent to the salary paid to the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners, respectively in the centre and state levels.  
    • The Bill seeks to amend these provisions to state that the salaries, allowances, and other terms and conditions of service of the central and state CIC and ICs will be determined by the central government.

Deductions in salary: 

  • The Act states that at the time of the appointment of the CIC and ICs (at the central and state level), if they are receiving a pension or any other retirement benefits for previous government service, their salaries will be reduced by an amount equal to the pension.
    • Previous government service includes service under (i) the central government, (ii) state government, (iii) corporation established under a central or state law, and (iv) government company owned or controlled by the central or state government.

    The Bill removes these provisions.

Evaluation 

Supreme Court on Right to Information

“The right to get the information.. is [a] natural right flowing from the concept of democracy. That right has reached new dimensions and urgency. That right puts greater responsibility upon those who take upon the responsibility to inform.”

Read Current Affairs for UPSC

The relevance of the Right to Information

Information as a right is a prerequisite for an effective exercise of the right to free speech and expression. Hence, the RTI Act was a consensus law and a product of public consultation. As the Act has empowered citizens and helped break the hold of vested interests over the administration, the law has always faced a threat from many in power.

How has the Act been weakened?

  • The Central Information Commissioner, the corresponding authorities in the States and other Information Commissioners are statutory functionaries vested with the power to review the decisions of public information officers in government departments, institutions and bodies.
  • The amendments propose to empower the Union government to set the tenure and remuneration of these Commissioners.
  • The security of tenure of an adjudicating authority, whose mandate is to intervene in favour of information-seekers against powerful regimes and bureaucrats, thus, has been undermined.
  • Freedom from interference and pressures provide the necessary atmosphere where one can work with an absolute commitment to the cause of transparency. This is no longer guaranteed. 

The irrationality of the Amendment

  • Any amendment to a law is bound to be viewed with suspicion if no fundamental need is seen for the changes it proposes.
  • The government claims its aim is to ‘rationalise’ the status of the authorities. 
    • It argues that while the Chief Election Commissioner is a constitutional functionary, the CIC is only a statutory authority. 
    • And while the CEC is equal in status to a Supreme Court judge, it would be incongruous for the CIC to enjoy the same status as the CIC’s orders are subject to judicial review by the high courts. 

    This is a fallacious argument as even the Election Commission’s decisions can be reviewed by the high courts.

The threat to Democratic Values

  • Independent structures set up to regulate and monitor the government are vital to a democratic state committed to delivering justice and constitutional guarantees. 
  • The separation of powers is a concept which underscores this independence and is vital to our democratic checks and balances. 
  • When power is centralised and the freedom of expression threatened no matter what the context, democracy is definitely in peril.

Threat to Federalism

  • Apart from the terms and conditions for the Central Information Commission, the Central government will also control through rules, the terms and conditions of appointment of Commissioners in the States. 
  • This is an assault on the idea of federalism.

Hence, instead of holding a public debate on making the RTI Act more effective, the government is seeking to dilute its provisions and seek more powers. What the government ought to focus is on the real challenges faced by these institutions, such as the pendency of applications; vacancies; and qualitative decline in adjudication standards.