Democracy and people's right to information
In a democracy, access to information stands as a pivotal element. Permitting individuals to seek and acquire public documents acts as a vital instrument in combating corruption, facilitating fuller participation of citizens in public affairs, enhancing government efficiency, promoting investment, and enabling individuals to exercise their fundamental human rights.
1. Need for RTI
Information serves as the life force of a democracy. Inadequate access to critical government policies and programs leaves citizens and lawmakers unable to make well-informed decisions, allowing inept or corrupt governments to operate behind a veil of secrecy. The Right to Information (RTI) is often synonymous with democracy, functioning as a tool to fortify the sovereignty of citizens.
Accountability of the government stands as a fundamental requirement in every political system. To ensure governmental accountability and transparency, the most potent tool wielded by the public is the right to information. This right has emerged as an incredibly influential instrument for ordinary individuals in their fight against injustice and corruption. It has resulted in the protection of honest officials and the prosecution of corrupt ones. Above all, it has empowered people to raise their voices and demand accountability from the government, becoming the grassroots voice of the populace.
The Right to Information is indispensable in a contemporary society governed by the principles of Rule of Law and Natural Justice. Mahatma Gandhi envisioned justice reaching even the most marginalized, and the Right to Information serves as a robust means for that last person in line to comprehend what the government is undertaking for them. It empowers the weakest individuals to question the most powerful entities, showcasing the merit of the Right to Information.
At its core, the RTI aims to keep citizens well-informed. Societies that are informed foster vibrant and functional democracies. This right empowers individuals to request information from governmental and public entities, including government documents and their duplicates. The RTI actively advocates for transparency and accountability. Citizens feel a sense of pride when exercising their right to access information at its source.
2. Key Features of the Right to Information Act, 2005(1)
The term "Information" encompasses various forms such as records, documents, emails, circulars, press releases, sample contracts, or electronic data.
Any citizen has the right to request information from a 'public authority,' which is obligated to respond promptly, typically within thirty days.
This Act amends the Official Secrets Act of 1889 and several other laws that previously restricted information disclosure in India.
Information can generally be obtained within 30 days of the request, while in cases concerning an individual's life or liberty, information must be provided within 48 hours. Exempted information loses its exemption status after 20 years from the relevant incident.
A penalty of Rs. 250 per day, not exceeding Rs. 25,000 in total, is imposed for refusing to receive an information request or failing to provide information.
If an applicant isn't furnished information within the stipulated time or is dissatisfied with the provided information, they can appeal first to a higher-ranking officer and subsequently to the Central Information Commission (CIC) or to the State Information Commission (SIC) within 90 days.
3. Key Provisions:
Section 2(h): Defines 'public authorities' encompassing constitutional bodies, authorities under various laws, and entities funded by public funds.
Section 4(1)(b): Mandates proactive information disclosure.
Section 7: Establishes a straightforward procedure for obtaining information.
Section 7: Sets time limits for information provision by Public Information Officers (PIOs).
Section 8: Limits information exemptions from disclosure.
Section 19: Implements a two-tier appeal mechanism.
Section 20: Prescribes penalties for delayed, incorrect, incomplete, or misleading information.
Section 23: Bars lower courts from entertaining suits related to this Act, while the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and high courts remains unaffected under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution.
4. Right to information guaranteed under Indian constitution
The Constitution of India guarantees six freedoms under Article 19(1), among which freedom of speech and expression stands as a key right. This provision aims to enable Indian citizens to develop and share their thoughts and ideas without undue hindrance. Embedded within the fundamental rights section of the Constitution, this freedom holds significant importance. Similarly, the Right to Information closely aligns with the concept of liberty of speech and expression.
A pivotal case addressing this issue was ruled upon by the esteemed Supreme Court of India in 1975, State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Raj Narain 1975 AIR 865 1975 SCR (3) 333 1975 SCC (4) 428(2). Here, an Indian citizen requested disclosure of government officials' information contained in a blue book detailing rules and instructions for the Prime Minister's protection during travel.
The petitioner contended that this document could expose corrupt practices in connection with the election campaign. The apex court noted that people cannot effectively express themselves unless they are informed. Therefore, it's evident that the right to free speech and expression cannot exist without its foundation, the Right to Information.
Denying citizens this right could potentially dismantle the entire political structure, the role of media, and the participation of the common man in society. Consequently, the Right to Information is intricately linked within Article 19 of the Indian Constitution.
5. International Conventions on the Right to Information
Presently, around 100 nations have legislation granting individuals the general right to access information held by public entities and mandating proactive disclosure of crucial informationan increase from only 13 countries in 1990.
Various international entities have officially acknowledged the essential and legal status of the freedom of information, advocating for effective laws to ensure practical respect for this right. These entities encompass:
The United Nations: The 2004 Joint Declaration by the three special mandates on freedom of expression at UN, OSCE, and OAS affirmed that accessing information held by public authorities is a fundamental human right. It suggested national-level comprehensive legislation emphasizing maximum disclosure, presuming accessibility to all information except for limited exceptions
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR): Article 19 of the UDHR emphasizes the right to freedom of opinion and expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media without boundary constraints
Council of Europe: In 1981, the Committee of Ministers adopted Recommendation No. R (81)19, focusing on access to Information Held by Public Authorities.
African Union: The African Commission on Human and People's Rights endorsed a Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression in Africa in 2002, emphasizing the right to access information held by public entities.
The Right to Information Act of 2005 aimed to enhance and broaden access to information. The government, prompted by the National Advisory Council, made significant changes to the existing Act to facilitate smoother access to information. This bill, having passed both houses of Parliament and receiving the President's assent on June 15, 2005, became law.
6. Purpose of the Act
The Act seeks to reconcile conflicting public interests by ensuring transparency to promote accountability and curb corruption while safeguarding other public interests. These include the efficient functioning of governments, optimal use of limited fiscal resources, and preserving confidentiality of sensitive information, as noted in the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Shaunak H. Satya (2011) 8 SCC 781(3) case.
The saying "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" fittingly characterizes the recent amendment Act passed by both houses of the Indian Parliament.
7. What Does the Act Entail?
Duration: The bill aims to modify Section 13 and 16 of the RTI Act, 2005. Previously, the Central Chief Information Commissioner and State Chief Information Commissioners and Information Commissioners had fixed terms of 5 years. However, the amendment specifies that their appointments will now be for terms as determined by the central government.
Remuneration: The amendment Act stipulates that the salary and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of the Chief Information Commissioner or Information Commissioners shall be prescribed by the Central government.
Impact of the Amendment Act: This Act confers increased authority to the central government and somewhat undermines the autonomy of state governments. Consequently, there's a higher likelihood that Information Commissioners may align themselves more closely with the central government.
This amendment Act could compromise the independence of the CIC, SCIC, and ICs. The CIC is now under the absolute control of the central government. With states in a comparatively weaker position, the central government might impede transparency concerning central matters, potentially hampering accountability.
8. Conclusion
The recent amendment Act introduced in parliament aims to render the RTI Act ineffectual, potentially transforming it into a "Toothless Monster." This move jeopardizes the autonomy of officers and raises significant concerns about the central government's ability to manipulate the body's operations. In the case of Prakash Singh v. UOI 2006 8 SCC, the Supreme Court emphasized that the police, as custodians of the law, must operate free from executive dominance.
This principle holds even more weight when applied to the CIC and SIC. According to numerous jurists and former Chief Information Commissioners, the RTI Act of 2005 stood as one of the most robust right-to-information legislations globally. However, the recent amendment diminishes its strength, consequently impeding the unrestricted flow of information from public authorities. Hence, it becomes evident why the government proposed this amendment Act.
Citation
11. Right to Information Act, 2005
22. State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Raj Narain 1975 AIR 865 1975 SCR (3) 333 1975 SCC (4) 428
33. The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Shaunak H. Satya (2011) 8 SCC 781
