21 years of right to information law – Achievements and bottlenecks

In a democracy the ultimate power vests with the people. The Executive exercises its power and authority as the trustee of the people. Accountability is the sine qua non of democracy.

Dr B R Ambedkar, the architect of our Constitution, has defended the choice of parliamentary system for India because it provides for continuous accountability of the Executive to the Legislature. Now a days it is becoming increasingly impracticable for the Legislatures to check the minute details of the entire administrative machinery. This is resulting in a democratic deficit in ensuring executive accountability. The Right to Information (RTI), as an insignia of democracy, is fulfilling this ideal and securing a government of the people, for the people and for the people.

This right to information is not something new. It is recognized by the Magna Carta, Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant of Human Rights. The United National General Assembly in its first session in 1 946 has resolved that freedom of Information is a fundamental human right and is the touchstone of all the freedoms to which the United Nations is committed. Sweden has enacted a law on right to information as long back as in 1766 and has become a pioneer.

The Supreme Court of India in 1 975 held in the State of UP vs Raj Narain that the people have a right to know every public act and everything that is done by their public functionaries. Justice P N Bhagawati was categorical in the S P Gupta vs Union of India that the right to information is implicit in the right to free speech and expression guaranteed under Article 1 9(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution.

The Parliament has enacted the Right to Information legislation in 2005 to preserve the paramountcy of this democratic ideal and to provide for a machinery for the exercise of this basic freedom. It is one of the landmark legislations that the Parliament has enacted ever since India has become independent. It ranks 4th in the global right to information rating by the Centre for Law and Democracy

Achievements:

From October 12, 2005, the day on which the Right to Information Act has become operational, the administration has moved from the culture of secrecy to transparency and openness. It has empowered the citizens to access plethora of information under the control of anybody, or public institution created, owned, controlled or substantially financed by the Government.

There is massive participation in the form of appeals. It is a testimony to the popularity of this progressive legislation. The applications for information range from the grassroot panchayat to the apex parliament level. Thanks to the information law, the PDS records are accurate, supply of essential commodities has been streamlined, and execution of MGNREGS works has become more transparent. High profile scams 2G Spectrum, Commonwealth Games have come to light. People are also resorting to RTI requests to cut the red tape and fast track the disposal of files.

The Supreme Court has held in the case of CBSE vs Adithyanth Bandopadyaya that the students have the right to inspect their answer sheets under the Right to Information Act. RTI is instrumental in curtailing delays in implementation of welfare and development programmes facilitating effective delivery of socio-economic services to the people.

RTI Act is also helping large number of people, including those from marginalized sections of society, to redress their grievances and realize their legitimate legal rights. It has become an effective tool to tackle corruption and hold the Executive accountable on day-to-day basis. The RTI Act is promoting openness in the functioning of Government Departments and strengthening accountability resulting in efficiency and good governance.

Bottlenecks

As in the case of any progressive legislation, there are number of bottlenecks and challenges in the implementation of RTI Act. The information laws are as effective as the systems that support it. In all the Departments, if senior officers are designated as Public Information Officers and Appellate Authorities, it will speed up the process of disposal of applications as they will be able to take immediate decisions.

Further, there is need for regular skill development through periodical training for the PIOs and 1 st Appellate Authorities to keep themselves abreast of the latest developments in the RTI law. If the 1 st Appeals are disposed of in accordance with the law within the stipulated, the number of 2nd appeal to the Commission will come down.

The most crucial aspect of RTI law is maintenance of records. In number of cases, the PIOs come before the Commission with the plea that the records are not traceable. The RTI Act makes it mandatory for every public authority to maintain its records duly catalogued and indexed to facilitate right to information. The Act also requires every public authority to publish information on 1 6 points pertaining to their organization and update the same on regular basis. If all the public authorities implement the proactive disclosure norms sincerely, the number of applications for information would drastically come down.

The Government of India has enacted the Public Records Act to ensure proper management, maintenance and preservation of public records of Central Government and its agencies. Some of the States like Maharashtra and Karnataka have enacted identical legislation in their States and the latest among them is Goa.

The Telangana Information Commission, in its annual report for 201 7 to 2020, has recommended that a similar law for scientific maintenance of records may be enacted in the State of Telangana. This recommendation was reiterated in the subsequent reports also. The Government of Telangana has enacted a law for maintenance of revenue records and the law for general records is yet to be made.

RTI and DPDP Act:

Section 8 of the RTI Act outlines certain exemptions under which information could be denied to a citizen. Sub Section (1 )(j) of Section 8 provides exemption to personal information which has no relationship with any public activity or would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of an individual. However, the PIOs/Appellate Authorities can order the disclosure of information if they are satisfied that such disclosure is in larger public interest.

The Supreme Court in the Bihar Public Service Commission vs Saiyed Razvi held that the exemptions provided under Section 8 is the rule and only in exceptional circumstances of larger public interest could the information be disclosed. The proviso to section 8(1)(j) is very significant. The information which cannot be denied to Parliament or State Legislature shall not be denied to any person.

If any piece of personal information could be shared with the Legislature, that cannot be denied to a citizen. Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act amended Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act giving complete exemption to the personal information. It has taken away the discretionary power of the PIO/Appellate Authority to appreciate the claims of individual privacy and right to information. The DPDP Act has also removed the parliamentary equality proviso in the RTI Act. Civil society has taken objection to this change on the grounds that it has unsettled the balance between individual privacy protection and democratic accountability.

They contend that this blanket exemption would undermine the basic democratic principle of accountability as access to records crucial for exposing corruption and leakage of public expenditure could be denied. It is the stand of the Government that the amendment is in tune with the standards of privacy right laid down by the Supreme Court.

The preamble of the RTI Act specifically states that it is necessary to harmonise the conflicting interests of transparency and accountability by providing access to information and to ensure that the revelation of information does not conflict with other public interests and individual rights. It is hoped that this issue also would be resolved at the earliest.

(The writer is First Chief Information Commissioner, Telangana)

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dr Raja Sadaram Soma