Open Access Research Article
INFORMATION ACCESS THROUGH RTI ACT, 2005; A TOOL TO ENHANCE CIVIC EMPOWERMENT AND ENGAGEMENT
Published Paper
Article Details
INFORMATION ACCESS THROUGH RTI ACT,
2005; A TOOL TO ENHANCE CIVIC EMPOWERMENT AND ENGAGEMENT
AUTHORED BY - ANU RAPHY
(1) INTRODUCTION
Freedom of Information was identified
as an integral part of Freedom of speech and expression by Resolution 59 of UN
General Assembly, which was adopted in the year 1946 and under Article 19 of
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights[1].
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) under Article 19
recognises freedom of speech and expression which includes within its ambit,
right to seek, receive and impart information.[2]
The main contributor to the Declaration of American Independence, Thomas
Jefferson (1743 - 1826) believed that “an informed citizenry is the bulwark of
a democracy”.[3]
In Indian perspective, the enactment
of The Right to Information Act, 2005, which upheld the citizens right to
access information held by public authorities, marks a significant milestone in
India’s democratic history and it can be termed as the most significant and
revolutionary piece of legislation in independent India.[4]As
stated in its objectives, democracy requires an informed citizenry and access
to information. Access to information is necessary for citizens to combat
corruption and to hold government agencies responsible for their action. It was
with this objective in mind the Act was enacted. The main goal behind its
implementation was to remove the gap between the public and government,
ensuring a participatory governance structure. It would be difficult to point
out a single legislation other than RTI Act which has the capacity to influence
the whole Indian society by providing them an instrument of power regardless of
their status or categorisation. The interdependence of Right to information and
freedom of speech and expression and the need for a comprehensive Right to
Information Act gained momentum in the latter part of 20 th century. Civil
society activism and judicial rulings play a significant role in this. At this
juncture, the Right to Information Act came as a turning point, ushering a new
period of openness and public participation. In addition to giving citizens the
right to request information, the Act requires public authorities to
proactively disclose certain information.
(2) HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND EVOLUTION
OF RTI ACT
IN INDIA
(2.1) BACKGROUND BEHIND THE ENACTMENT OF RTI ACT
India’s aspiration for accountability
and openness dates back to its pre independence period when the fight against
colonial control laid the foundations for right to information. After
independence, there were sporadic legislative actions and administrative
instructions to promote transparency in government but efforts to
institutionalise the right to information only gradually gained pace[5]. An NGO
named Mazdoor Kisan shakti Sangathan (MKSS) started a protest in Rajasthan in
1990, demanding that the government provide details of the state employment
generation scheme. To spearhead a nationwide effort to enact the RTI Act, a
group of activists and members of non-governmental organizations founded the
National Campaign for People's Right to Information (NCPRI) in 1996. The Indian
government estabilished a committee to
draft a bill pertaining to freedom of information ,with social activist Hari
Dev Shourie serving as its head and thus Freedom of Infromation Bill, 2000
which later became Freedom of Infromation Act,2002 came into force.[6]Freedom of
Information Act, 2002 was the first attempt in this regard.Though with a narrow
scope and application, this act set the stage for a more expansive legal framework that
eventually became the Right to Information Act, 2005.
The culture of secrecy prevalent in
the administrative domain for ages was broken by this act, which asserted
peoples right to access information. India’s governance entered a new era of
transparency and accountability with the passage of RTI Act. The RTI Act, which
came into effect on october 12, 2005 was the result of years of activism,
public hearings and court decisions that acknowledged the access to information
as a fundamental freedom required for a strong democracy. The RTI Act was
enacted after a protracted legislative process marked by stakeholder consultations,
lengthy debates and modifications intended to reconcile the rightful concerns
of public authorities with the necessity of transparency.
(2.2) IMPACT OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS ON EVOLUTION OF RTI ACT
The importance of imparting
information to people regarding governance and actions of public authorities
was reinforced by the judiciary through a series of judicial decisions.
State of UP v. Raj
Narain & Ors[7] established that Right to know is
derived from freedom of speech and expression and people of the country have
the right to know about every public Act and to be ensured that everything is
done in a public way by public functionaries.This idea was further reinforced
in the case of Maneka Gandhi v.
Union of India[8] in which
court reiterated that freedom of speech and expression includes right to gather
information.The significance of transparency and accountability in a democratic
form of government was highlighted in SP Gupta v. President of India
& Ors[9]. Further in
Secretary,
Ministry of Information and broadcasting,Government of India & Ors.
v. Cricket Association of Bengal and
others[10], Supreme
Court identified as an intrinsic component of freedom of speech and expression,
Right to acquire information and disseminate it.The supreme Court recognised
Right to Information as the part and parcel of Right to life under Article 21
in its decision in Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd v. Proprietors of Indian Express Newspapers, Bombay Pvt Ltd and Others[11]Thus
through these and many other decisions, judiciary laid down the foundation upon
which present RTI Act was developed.
(3) ANALYSIS OF RTI ACT, 2005
(3.1) Objectives and Provisions of the Act
The Act's statement of object and
reasons emphasizes its scope as a law that guarantees citizens' access to
information under public authority's control and fosters accountability and
transparency in government operations by establishing an institutional framework
for state and central information commissions[12].The
primary goal of the Act is to strike a balance between the government's
competing interests in protecting information related to them and the right of
individuals to be informed about government actions and decisions.All central,
state, and local public entities in India are covered by the Act, including
ministries, departments of government, state-owned enterprises, and independent
organisations.
Under the provisions of the Act, the
term “Information”[13] includes,
any material in any form such as contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data
material held in any electronic form, opinion, advices, memos, orders logbooks
and information relating to any private body that a public authority may access
under any other law in force and right to Information delineats the idea of
inspecting work, documents and records, taking notes, extracts or certified
copies of documents or record and all other activities as mentioned under
section 2 (j) of the Act.
With a wider scope it covers the
legislative and executive branches of government as well as any organistaion
that receives significant funding from government. Under sections 6 and 7, Act
gives the procedure for requesting information and the manner and mandates of
disposal of information, subject to the limitations and exceptions listed in
sections 8 and 9 of the Act. Information that could jeopardise India’s
sovereignty and integrity, the states security, strategic, scientific or
economic interests or information that has been expressly forbidden from
publication by a court of law or other body are all covered by these
exemptions.
(3.2) Exceptions and Exemptions under the Act
The Act exempts from its ambit,
disclosure of certain informations such as those which may effect the
sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or
economic interests of the state, relation with foreign state or which may lead
to incitement of an offence. Section 8 (1)(b) and (c)[14] prohibits information expressly forbidden to
be published by any court of law or tribunal as well as those which could cause
breach of parliamentary privileges. Informations regarding commercial
confidence, trade secrets, infromation available to a person in fiduciary
relationship, cabinet papers are all exempted. Apart from this there is no
requirement under the Act to publish those informations, the disclosure of
which may endanger life or physical safety of any person, or which may impede
the process of investigation. Section 8(2) requires public authority to
disclose the information if public interest outweighs the harm to protected
interest Apart from this, section 9 specifies ground for rejection of access to
information in case of copyright infringement.
(3.3) Procedure for accessing information
Every public organisation is required
by section 4 of the RTI Act to maintain records, proactively publish particular
type of information, and distribute information through a variety of channels
such as websites, public notices and media releases. The purpose of this
proactive disclosure obligation is to promote greater public understanding and
involvement in governance processes, reduce the burden on PIO’s and enhance
openness.
Apart from this realising the need of
integrating technology to make information more accessible, Act streamlines and
increase efficiency by allowing RTI requests and appeals to be sent
electronically using email and internet platforms. In order to guarantee that
information is easily accessible to citizens in a variety of locations the Act
also encourages the digitisation of records and the use of electronic
techniques for record keeping and dissemination. In a nutshell, The RTI Act
creates a strong foundation for increasing accountability, openness and public
empowerment inside India’s political system.
(4) CHALLENGES FACED BY RTI ACT
However years after its enactment,
the effectiveness of the Act is still a question. As per the statistical data
published by Satark Nagarik Sangathan[15]
an NGO in India, with the aim to promote transparency and accountability among
governing bodies in its 2022-23 report demonstrates the current scenario
revolving Information Commissions and their working.As per the data published
there are 3,88,886 pending appeals before central and various state commissions
and as on October 2023 in four states, Information Commissions were not at all
appointed.
(4.1) Huge number of pending cases
One of the major issues confronting
India’s accountability system is the substantial backlog in processing of
grievances and appeals. Due to this, applicants have to wait for months and
even years for their cases are to be heard by Information commissions and this
negates the timely access to information guaranteed bt RTI Act. As per the data
published by Satark
Nagrik Sangathan (SNS) or Society for Citizens Vigilance Initiatives (SCVI),
set up in 2003, is a citizens’ group with a mandate to promote transparency and
accountability in government functioning, 3,88,886 cases are pending for
disposal as on June 30,2023.[16]The entire
idea of access to information and transparency wil become meaningful only if it
is provided within a reasonable time. Inordinate delay in disposing of requests
renders the very objective of the Act a failure.
(4.2) Bureaucratic opposition
The implementation of Right to
information Act in India has significant challenges due to institutional
impediments and bureaucratic resistance within government agencies and public
entities. Even though its required by law to provide citizens with information,
many public officials are reluctant to embrace its transparency because they
see RTI Act as a threat to their authority and independence.[17] The
opposition often leads to public information officers addressing RTI requests
using evasive techniques, refusals and delays.
Bureaucratic obstacles involving
overbearing redtapism, convoluted processes and a lack of accountability
measures make it harder for the RTI system to function effectively.[18] Public
Information officer’s may use delay strategies to discourage applicants and
deter them from seeking information such as asking unwanted explanations or
forwarding requests to other departmnets. Implementation of Act is further
complicated due to absence of guidelines for proactive disclosure and a culture
of secrecy, which encourage opacity and non- cooperation in bureaucratic
circles.
(4.3) Insufficient proactive disclosures
The lack of proactive disclosure by
governmental institutions is another significant barrier to the RTI Act’s
enforcement in India. Even though section 4 of the Act requires public entities
to proactively publish certain kinds of information through required
publication schemes, compliance with these requirements is nevertheless erratic
and uneven. In Kishan Chand v. Union
of India[19]
directions have been given by Supreme Court of India to Information Commission
for effectively monitoring implementation of section 4 of the Act. Many
governmental organisations view proactive disclosure as only a procedural need
rather than an significant obligation which leads to the partial or selective
release of pertinent public information.
(5) ROLE OF RTI IN ENHANCING GOOD GOVERNANCE
The term “governance” means the
process of decision making and its implementation with welfare of society as
the main goal. Any government can govern a society but for a governance to
become good governance it need to fulfill certain criterias such as
Transparency, Accountability, Participatory, Responsive, inclusive of all
sections of people and follows rule of law. It ensures that corruption is
avoided and the voice of the most disadvantaged sections of society are also
taken care of.
(5.1) Transparency in governmental activities
In State of Uttar Pradesh
v. Raj Narain[20], the
Honourable Supreme Court held that, the citizens of the country have a right to
be informed about every public action taken by their public servants. They have
a right to be informed about every detail of public transaction, regardless of
its significance. The right to know which is derived from the idea of free
speech though not absolute is a reason to exercise caution when concealment is
demanded for transactions by public authorities. The idea that disclosure of
information should be a rule and secrecy an exception was highlighted in
SP Gupta v. President of India
and Ors[21].By
nurturing the culture of openness and answerability in formulating and, implementing
policies and decisions, the Act enhance transparency in decision making. By
ensuring that governmental actions comply with the values of impartiality,
fairness and public welfare transparency in decision making promotes public
trust and confidence in the democratic system.
The Act gives public access to
information about the factors that go into making government choices, how
policies are formulated and what influences are used to shape executive and
legislative actions. Because of its transparency, public officials may be held
accountable for their actions and citizens are able to closely monitor the
decision making process, which serves as a check against arbitrary authority
exercises and excessive pressure.[22]Apart from
that having access to information enables people to participate actively in
political discourse, offer suggestions for policy changes and push for laws
that better represent their concerns and interests.
(5.2) Accountability
As it empowers citizens to hold
government agencies and officials accountable for their actions, the RTI Act is
essential in promoting accountability in the delivery of public services. By
using RTI requests, citizens can monitor the effectiveness, efficiency, and
integrity of public government by obtaining information on the distribution of
resources, the execution of programs and the provision of essential services.
This accountability process exposes inadequacies, anomalies and instances of
failure to execute legal tasks so serving as a deterrent against mismanagement,
corruption and misuse of authority.
Other than that the possibility of
public examination endangered by the RTI framework encourages public bodies to
improve processes for providing services, increase transparency in their
opertaions, and put policies in place to prevent and handle compalints. The Act
fostrs an environment of openenss and accounatbility by providing the public
with access to ifromation on government programs and spending. This means that
public servants are accountable to both the people they represent and their
superiors. In the provision of public services, this accountability cycle
upholds the principle of good governance, integrity and moral behaviour.
(5.3) Participatory governance
For people to participate in decision
making process they should be aware of all governmental actions and policies.
Every public authority is expected to keep all of its records appropriately in
order to ensure the greatest possible exposure of information about government
laws, regulations, and reports, including decision-making processes. Therefore,
under section 4 of the Act, it is incumbent of the public authorities to make
proactive disclosures by disseminating information over the internet and
publishing pertinent papers.
(5.4) Avoidance of corruption
Most of the corrupted activities
happen in the absence of proper checks and controls and in the confidence that
no one is watching. RTI Act was enacted with avoidance of corruption as one of
its objectives. When government is under an obligation to disclose all their
activities to public corruption can rarely happen.
(5.3) Inclusiveness
Encouraging civic engagement and
participation is essential for good governance. By providing citizens tools and
knowledge to required to participate effectively in decision making, the Act
strengthens democratic institutions, encourage community engagement, and
increases the legitimacy of governmental actions[23].RTI
requests are a useful tool for citizens to gather information, spread knowledge
of issues of public concern and mobilise support for initiatives and policy
changes that align with their value and aspirations.
In addition the RTI Act creates
channels for positive communication and feedback, which encourages dialogue,
coordination and cooperation between governmental and non governmental
organisations. By advocating for changes to governmental policies, programs and
processes, citizens can use the information obtained through RTI requests to
support more inclusive and receptive governance. By fostering a sense of
accountability and acommunity among residents, this participatory approach to
government strengthens social cohesion and propels the realisation of
democratic values like empowerment, fairness and justice.
(5.4) Role of media and civil society
Media is considered as a key player
in the growth of information society and act as a major promoter of freedom of
expression and plurality of information[24]They
are ubiquitous and have a big impact on how societies are shaped; they create
the public forum for discussion and information that promotes social and
cultural dialogue, engagement, and accountability.[25]
There is an increasing recognition
that, in order to achieve desired outcomes, people must be involved in the
creation and execution of public policies and programs. In a countrys growth
process, through advocacy, research and supervision efforts , civil society
organisations and the media play a crucial role. To improve the RTI framework,
civil society organisations, media and governmental agencies must work together
more closely to identify challenges, supervise implementation and push for improvements.
A proactive civil society is essential to ensure successful government. CSO can
conduct public forums on RTI related problems, provide legal aid to applicants,
and push for legislative changes to strengthen the RTI regime by utilising
their networks and areas of expertise.
In the same way media through their investigative
reporting and coverage are crucial in exposing wrongdoing, corruption and abuse
of power. The RTI Act should be promoted to journalists and media organisations
as a means of doing investigative journalism, gaining access to official
records and information and holding public servants responsible for their
actions. Increasing public participation in governance processes, facilitating
information transmission and enhancing transparency are all possible through
fortifying partnerships between media, civil society organisations and the
government.
Achieving the concept of good
governance in its entirety is a challenge and so far no country have
successfully achieved it but we can tread the path to good governance with the
aid of RTI Act. Good governance is a process and effective implementation of RTI
provisions which aims at attaining transparency and accountability helps in
smooth flow of that process.
To summarise, the Right to Information
has noteworthy consequences for advancing good governance in India by
augmenting transparency in decision making procedures, motivating
accountability in public service delivery and cultivating citizen involvement
and involvement in governance. However in order to fully realise the benefits
of the Act, coordinated efforts must be made to address implementation
obstacles, strengthen institutional capacities and establish a culture of
openness and responsiveness in both governmental and nongovernmental
organisations.
6. SUGGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(6.1) Policy measures
An indepth analysis of Right to
Information Act reveals policy implications as india moves forward in its
attempts to advance accountability and openness in governance. These
ramifications are essential for directing upcoming legislative initiatives
meant to promote public empowerment and strengthen democratic governance.
The requirement for continuous
legislative modifications to address changing issues and shortcomings in the
RTI system is one significant policy effect. This included making the Act’s
exceptions more understandable and logical expanding its application to include
private organisations carrying out public functions and stiffening the penalty
for breaking the law. In addition to that legislators ought to think about
enacting policies that simplify RTI process, remove administrative roadblocks
and promote proactive information sharing by government agencies.
(6.2) Improving institutional infrastructure
Other than enacting new laws there
are a number of strategies that can be used to improve accountability and
openness in government, expanding on the foundation laid by RTI Act.[26] Firstly
in order to effectively implement the Act, institutional capacities must be strengthened.
This includes investing in information technology infrastructure to digitize
records and enable online access to information as well as training Public
Information Officers and Information commissions. Both the centrall and state
governments are also responsible to make sure that necessary number of
information commissioners are appointed on time and set a minimum limit upon
the number of cases to be disposed by each Information Commissioner. This will
improve their efficiency as since they have to meet a target they will look
through the complaints received. Disposed cases if mentioned in a database will
avoid the workload of Commisssion by avoiding the instances of dealing with
same kind of complaints by more than one person during same or different period
of time.
(6.3) Imposing duties and penalties on head of the departments
In the case of proactive disclosure
under section 4, which is the duty of public authority, they shall be punished
for its non performance.[27] This
measure may reduce the number of pending cases as public need not submit an RTI
application for those informations which are already available in website. Very
often department websites remain not updated. This situation can be resolved by
making head of the departments liable. The capability of Information commission
to utilise such implied powers were mentioned in Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttarpradesh and Ors.[28]Apart from
this, penalty should also be imposed for failure in maintaining department records.
(6.4) Creating awareness among people
Efforts must be taken to cultivate an
environment of transparency and accountability in governmental organisations by
means of awareness campaigns, workshops and capacity building programs. Public
servants must be inspired to embrace openness as a core value and understand
the importance of proactive disclosure in building public confidence. In a same
sense, people ought to have the authority to claim their right to knowledge,
engage in political processes and hold public servants responsible for their
actions.
(6.5) Enhance role of media and civil society
Through advocacy, research and
monitoring efforts the media and civil society organisations play a critical
role in promoting accountability and transparency. As partners in governance,
policy makers ought to interact with civil society organisations and the media
using their expertise, connections and assets to supervise execution, pinpoint
shortcomings and promote modifications.[29]
Strengthening partnerships between governmental organisations, civil society
organistaions and the media can enhance transparency, promote the sharing of
information and encourage greater public participation in governance
procedures. In conclusion the comprehensive methods incorporating institutional
fortification, stakeholder engagement and legislative amendments are necessary
for future efforts to advance openness and accountability in India’s governnanc
elandscape. Policy makers can move closer to the objectives of good governance,
democratic empowerment and holistic development in India by including
transparency and accountability concerns into policy making and execution.
(6.6) Need for expanding the scope of public authority
The term public Authority has been
defined under the Act "Public authority" refers to any body,
institution, or authority of self-government that is established or constituted
by or under constitution or any other legislations made by parliament or state
legislatures or appropriate government notifications. It includes body owned,
controlled, and non-governmental organization, which are substantially financed
either directly or indirectly, by funds provided by the appropriate Government.
An examination of this definition gives an idea that it includes, all bodies
created by or under Constitution of India as well as by other statutes. Thus
all constitutional, statutory and local self government bodies are public
authorties and it includes state legislature, parliament and judiciary also.
The second part of the definition highlights that all bodies, owned, controlled
and substantially financed directly or indirectly by funds provided by central
or state governments are also Public Authorities. However the term
substantially financed is no where defined in the Act.[30]Under
the term state all those who are a part of it also constitutes state and
applying the same logic to the terms of legislature, parliament and judiciary,
each and every person constituting those organs are also amenable to the
provisions of RTI Act.[31]
So far private entities and public
charitable trusts are exempted from the ambit of RTI Act. In the current
scenario where private entities undertakes public functions, there is a need
for extending the ambit of RTI Act keeping in mind the very objective of the
Act. Be it a private or public Authority no individual or entity in the country
have the authority to indulge in shady businesses.
There is also an increasing trend by
state and central government establishing relief funds under various heads and
denying the transparency in the name of public charitable trust. These trusts
established either under the name of Chief Minister of the State or Prime
minister of the country receives huge donations from the public in good faith. Doesn’t
a person who contributes a portion of their wealth or income have the right to
know how and where it was utilised? A fund established in the name of
authorities presupposes genuineness to some extent and this trust and faith of
people in the government initiatives is being utilised here. If fund is used
completely for genuine reasons, what is prohibiting them from disclosing the
fund allocation?
A fund constituted by a
constitutional machinery, where board of trustees are appointed by them, where
there are some budgetary allocations for their advertisements, and which
recieves substantial amount of funding from other government departments as in
the case of PMCARES, there should be disclosure as to the ways in which fund
was used.
In split verdict by division bench of
Delhi High Court such funds were considered as public Authorities. In
accordance with the preamble of RTI Act, transparency and account a beerlessility
are the essentials for the functioning of public authority. As stated by Reserve
bank of India v. General Finance
and Investment Co. Ltd[32],
Interpretation of a statutory provision must depend upon the context and text.
The context behind enactment of RTI Act was to bring transparency in all walks
of public Authorities. If there are possibilities for hidden motives under some
other ground the whole RTI Act will become a failure.
CONCLUSION
Everyone has the right to access the
information that public agencies hold since they are guardians of the public
good The Right to Information Act Is an important tool for bringing about
social changes and increasing transparency in administrative system. It
represents hope for India's efforts to achieve accountability, openness and
sound government. For an Act to achieve its full and effective implementation,
awareness of people about the statute is necessary, the failure of which will
render its objectives to remain in paper.
There are number of obstacles in the
way of promoting accountability and openness in governance. The RTI Act’s
transformative influence is limited by bureaucratic opposition, insufficient
proactive disclosure and shortcomings in enforcement procedures that
continuously impede its effective execution. Coordinated efforts from all
parties involved - policy makers, public servants, civil society organisations
and the media are necessary to overcome these obstacles Maintaing the RTI
framework and accomplishing its goals will require continued legislative
changes, efforts to create capacity and involvement with stakeholders. The main
goals of policy interventions should be to make exceptions more understandable
and logical to make non compliance sanctions stronger and to incorporate
transparency concerns into larger governance reforms. In addition, the
government, which has demonstrated such wisdom and bravery in passing the act,
must make sure that the agencies in charge of carrying it out don't lack
resources so they can perform to the best of their abilities. Initiatives to
improve institutionalised capacities, increase public awareness and promote
cooperation between the media, civil society and government agencies are also
essential. Free and open exchange of information is the cornerstone of
successful government. Through a collaborated effort we can make changes in the
political landscape of our country by creating transparency, responsiveness and
accountability.
[1] UNITED NATIONS AND THE RULE OF LAW, https://www.un.org
(last visited Sep.4,2024).
[3] Gaddela Srikanth, Unlocking
the access: Examining the right to Information legislations of India and
Bangaldesh, Third Concept,14,15-17 (2024)
[4] OP Kejriwal, Right
to Information Act; Loopholes and Road ahead, 41, Money, banking and
Finance, EPW, 940, 940-941, (2006)
[5] A Archana, Analysing
openness: An in depth evaluation of the right to Information Act and its
impacts on effective governance in India, 41 Juni Khyat, 29, 30 -37, (2024)
[6] Nilotpal Bhattacharjee,Newspaper Coverage and awareness of Right to information Act : A case
study in Assam, 22 SIJSS,198, 199-211, (2024)
[8] Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597
[9] SP Gupta v. President of India & Ors, AIR 1982 SC
149
[10] Secretary, Ministry of Information and
broadcasting,Government of India and Others v. Cricket Association of Bengal
and Others,1995 AIR 1236
[11] Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd v. Proprietors of Indian
Express Newspapers, Bombay Pvt Ltd and Others, 1989 AIR 190
[12] Right to Information Act, 2005, S.3, No.22, Acts of
Parliament, 2005 (India)
[15] SATARK NAGARIK SANGATHAN, https://www.snsindia.org, last
visited Sept 6, 2024
[16] Michael Riegner, Access to Information as a Human Right
and Constitutional Guarantee. A Comparative Perspective,50, LPAALA,332, 332-366
(2017)
[17] Pankaj KP Shreyaskar, Investigating compliance of RTI
Act, 48 EPW,19,19-22, (2013)
[18] Anshu Jain, Good Governance and Right to Information:
A perspective, 54 JILI 506, 506-519, (2012)
[20] State of Uttar Pradesh V. Raj Narain,1975 AIR 865
[22] Sahina Mumtaz Laskar, Importance of Right to
Information for Good Governance in India, BLR (2016)
[25] Supra Note 16
[26] Mahua Sengupta, Awareness of Right to Education Act,
2009 among the Tribal parents, A study on dakshin Dinajpur District, 9 RRIJM, (2024)
[28]Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttarpradesh and Ors.( 2008)2
SCC 409
[29] Nilotpal Bhattacharjee, Newspaper coverage and
awareness of Right to Information Act: A case study in Assam, 22 SJSS 3, 3-14, (2024)
[31] N Sai Vinod,Attempts to Erode RTI Mechanism, 49 EPW
30, 30-32, (2014)
[32]Reserve bank of India v. General Finance and
Investment Co. Ltd ,1987 AIR 1023
Article Information
INFORMATION ACCESS THROUGH RTI ACT, 2005; A TOOL TO ENHANCE CIVIC EMPOWERMENT AND ENGAGEMENT
Authors: ANU RAPHY
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2024/11/14
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.