Open Access Research Article
RTI AMENDMENT: INFORMATION DRIVEN OR INFORMATION CURTAILED?
Published Paper
Article Details
AUTHORED BY -
SAYESHA GAMBHIR
India is a democratic country and has its own written constitution. The constitution
of India sets out the federal structure, political conduct and powers of the government
through which the country runs. The preamble gives the authority to the people
of the country that the constitutional provisions must flow through “WE THE
PEOPLE”. In a democratic country like India, the government is elected through
the citizens of the country. To make sure that the govt works in a proper manner,
the concept of Good Governance came into picture, of which RTI is a part of it.
Good Governance is a process of governance through which government rules in such
a way that it ensures more accountability and transparency to the citizen of the
country. In India, one such tool to ensure Good Governance is Right to
Information Act, 2005[2], which later was amended in 2019 and is known as Right to Information (Amendment)Act,
2019.
Right to Information acts as a tool in a participatory democracy to
protect the welfare of the people. In a democratic country like India, having
access to information encourages its citizens to critically examine the acts
and policies of their government. The administrative system is more accessible
because to right to information. When records are available to the public, government
actions become transparent. Transparency allows for the investigation and eradication
of widespread corruption. However, the amendment to the original act changed major
dimensions of the Act as the 2019 amendment to the act brought amendments to
three sections, i.e., Section 13, 16 and Section 27. This research paper tends
to study and analyze those amendments which occurred through 2019 amendment.
The purpose of this project is to study and analyze the Right to Information
(Amendment)Act, 20193[3], and to describe the pros and cons of the present amended act.
1.
INTRODUCTION to RTI Act,2005
Right to Information (RTI) is a statute
passed by the Indian Parliament in 2005[4] that gives its citizen, the right to access information from the government or
any public authority. The Act aims to promote
accountability and transparency in the functioning of government agencies and public authorities. The act has gone
through various development and thus has evolved from
time to time. The purpose and objective of Right to Information (RTI) is to
promote transparency and
accountability in the functioning of government institutions and empower citizens to participate in the democratic
process. RTI allows individual to access to information by requesting it from public authorities and receive timely and ensuring that citizens have access
to information that has effect on the lives of the people of the country and to
ensure that decisions are made in an
open and accountable manner. This helps to prevent corruption, enhance
the quality of public services, and promote good governance. Under the RTI Act,
the application process
is hassle free as any citizen can file an application with a government department or public authority
seeking information related
to its functioning, decisions, policies,
and so on. The responding time
given to the authorities is of 30 days[5], and the information sought must be provided unless
it falls under the exempted category. RTI laws also help in ensuring public participation in decision making process
and to hold the governments accountable, and exercise their fundamental human rights.
However, the respective act has changed in a
dynamic sense since the 2019 amendment[6] took place.
But the major portion of the act remains the
same and the citizen of the country still fights for the transparency and never tends to settle for the less. We the people are the essence of this democratic country and thus,
people thrive for freedom viz. freedom of information, viz. Right to Information.
1.1
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The Right to Information (RTI) Act in India has undergone a long and complex evolution.
1.
The
history of the Right to Information (RTI) in India can be traced back to the
1970s, where the journalists and
several social activists began to demand access to knowledge and information from the government
authorities and this need for transparency grew stronger during the Emergency period (1975-77), when the government tried
to censor and control the press[7].
2.
The
movement related to the RTI was initiated in late 1990s by Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), whereby it gained
momentum with several grassroots organizations and civil society groups, demanding laws ensuring right to
access to information from the government. Another
event which gave boost to the movement
was establishment of that the National Campaign for People's Right
to Information (NCPRI) in 1996 by a group of
activists, journalists, and lawyers. The NCPRI demanded
a law that would guarantee citizens the right to
access government information.
3.
In
2002, the Government of India set up a committee for recommendation for a
framework related to establishment of RTI Act and a bill for
the same was proposed in that
meeting, i.e., Freedom of Information
Bill, 2002, which later was called as Freedom of Information Act, 2002[8] which led to the passing of the Right to Information Act, 2005. The Act
came into force on 12 October, 2005, and has been amended in 2019 and latest in 2021.
4.
In
2019, the government of India passed amendments to the RTI Act[9], which led to distress among
civilians’ society that the
amendments would dilute the effectiveness of
the Act. The proposed amendments
included changes to the salaries and allowances of Information Commissioners, changes to transparency and
accountability of Information Commissioners and changes
regarding the filing of
appeals.
The RTI Act has acted as a tool to promote
transparency and accountability in government
functioning and that of public authorities. It has empowered the
citizens of the country to demand
information and hold the government accountable for its actions. However, from
the recent years, the concern
has been raised regarding the
effectiveness of the act, particularly after the amendments made in 2019. Civil society
continues to advocate
for greater transparency and accountability in governance and access to information.
2. AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY 2019 BILL
RTI Act, 2005 got amended in 2019 and is now known as Right to Information
(Amendment)Act, 2019. The Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2019[10], was passed on July 22, 2019, by the Rajya Sabha and by the Lok Sabha on
July 25, 2019 and the bill became the act when it got assented from the
president. The act of 2019 brought changes to section 13, section 16 and
section 27 of the original 2005 act. Following we will elaborate that what changes
were brought to the original act.
The Right to Information (RTI) Amendment Act of 2019 in India made changes
to three sections of the original RTI Act of 2005,
namely Section 13 and Section 16 and Section 27 respectively[11].
Prior to the amendment, the term of Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioner to serve the office was of five years. The 2019 RTI
Amendment Act, amended the
sub-section 1 of Section 13[13] and changed the term of the CIC and ICs from "a term of five years" to "a term as may be
prescribed by the Central
Government". This indicates
that it is now on the discretion of
the Centre to decide the term of service of CIC and ICs. This change gives the Central Government the power to decide the term of the CIC and ICs.
Furthermore, the amendment also made changes to the sub-section 5 of
Section 13[14], regarding the salary and
allowance of Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioner. Previously, the salary of CIC and ICs was equal to those of the chief
election commissioner and the
election commissioner respectively.
After the 2019 Amendment, the salaries of CIC and ICs will be prescribed by the appropriate government, and
thus making it on the discretion on the central or State government to decide
the salaries and allowance of the
respective commissioners.
Thus, the above amendment changed the term of service and
salaries and allowance of the CIC and
ICs to such an extent that now it depends on the discretion of the Centre to
decide it accordingly.
S
ection 16 of the act is similar
to that of 13 but section 16 is related
to that of the State CIC and State ICs.
This amendment to section 16 gave autonomous powers to the Central
Government in such a manner that, Prior to the amendment, the term of State CIC and State ICs to serve the office was of five years. The 2019 RTI Amendment
Act changed the term of the State CIC and State ICs from "a term of five years" to "a term as may
be prescribed by the Central Government".
This change to subsection
1[16] and
2[17] of
Section 16 gives the Central Government
the power to decide the term of the CIC and ICs.
Furthermore, the amendment also made changes to the subsection 5 of
section 16[18] which deals with the salary
and allowance of the State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioner. Previously, the
salary of State CIC and ICs was equal
to those of the
chief election commissioner of state and the election commissioner of the state
respectively. After the 2019 Amendment, the salaries of the State CIC and State ICs will be prescribed by the
appropriate government which is Central government. Thus, regarding the
appointment and salaries of State CIC
and State ICs, the power lies to the Central government, making the decision
on their own discretion.
Section 27 of
the act deals with the power of the appropriate authority to make rules
regarding the provision of the Act[20]. The 2019 Amendment
led to the insertion of 2 new clause to Section
27. The 2 new clauses
that are added in Section
27 are added under subsection 2, after clause
(c), i.e., “ca” and “cb”. These new clause tends to give power and
authority to the Centre to act in
accordance with section 13 so as to determine the tenure and salaries of the
CIC, ICs State CIC and State ICs. The
motive of the amendment to section 27 is that to give authority to the Central Government to give effect to the
amendments provided in Section 13 and 16 of the said act.
Salary Deductions
The 2019
amendment also helped in removal of the provisions which led to salary
deduction. Prior to the 2019 amendment, there was deduction
in the salaries of the CIC and ICs, if, at the time
of their appointment, they received any pension
or retirement benefit from previous government service[21]. But this provision
was removed after the 2019 amendment.
It is important to note that the
2019 RTI Amendment Act also introduced other changes to the RTI Act, such as the introduction of fees
for filing an appeal and the exemption of Intelligence and Security Agencies from the purview of RTI Act, but these
changes were not made to any specific section
of the RTI Act.
However, these amendment came
with the mixed perception where some crticised it, and some look forward for the positive changes in
the Act. Some argued that these amendment led to weaking of the purpose of RTI act, and also it gave undue
advantage to the power of the centre, making
a weak federal structure. At the same time, many arued that it also came with
some positive changes like e-filing,
removal of salary deductions and more protection of personal information. Thus, the amendment
to the act has both, the drawback
and the advantages, and we will now further
discuss the drawbacks
and the positive outcome from the proposed
amendment.
3.
DISADVANTAGES AND OBJECTIONS
AGAINST THE BILL
The Right to Information (RTI) Amendment Act
of 2019 in India introduced some changes to the
original RTI Act of 2005. The amendment to the original act came with positive
changes as well as some drawbacks for
the Indian society. The following are some drawbacks of the 2019 RTI Amendment Act:
3.1
Weakening
of the RTI Act and compromise of independence of Information Commissioner:
Amendment to the section 13 and
16 of the act tends to weakens the purpose and objective of the original Act. Section 13 and 16 of 2005 act was inserted
with the aim of maintain independency and transparency of the Information Commissioners so as to reduce
the biasness. The aim of the RTI Act, 2005[22] was a landmark legislation that brought transparency and accountability in the functioning of the government. But the amendment
to these sections tends to disregard the main objective of the act and
thus tends to dilute the powers of
the Information Commissions and reduce the transparency and accountability of the government as the amendment
gave the power to the central government for the appointment of the Chief Information
Commissioner and Information Commissioner. The
new amendment has severely weakened
the independence and autonomy of Chief Information Commissioner and Information
Commissioner as their tenure and salary are now
fixed by Central Government, making them puppets of the Central Government.
Thus, these amendments led to weakening the agenda and aim of the Act and led to the compromise
to independence of Information
commissioner, giving more powers to the central government.
3.2
Against the federal
Structure of the State:
The 2019 amendment tends to give excess
power to the central government and it is against the federal structure of the State. The aim of the RTI act is
to provide proper information to the public against every legislation, action and anything
that the state does, and thus it must remain independent from the
state. But this amendment
to the RTI act tends to contaminates
the true nature of the act and also of Delegated Legislation. The objective of the act was to ensure the transparency and
independent autonomy. But, through amendment
in 2019, it allows the government to select the CIC and ICs which
directly manipulates the functioning of the CIC and ICs in such a manner
that the appropriate government selects the authority
of their choice and thus make them their puppet.
Hence, which could lead to a situation
where the CIC and ICs are not able to function independently.
Thus, it is rightly quoted by Lord Acton “Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely”
3.3
Exclusion
of political parties:
The aim of the act was to provide transparency to the general
public from all the government actions and to give people the
power, to know every action and the motive behind
the action. However, the 2019 amendment has removed political parties from the ambit of the public authorities under
Right to Information Act, 2005. This
means that political parties
are no longer obligated to disclose information about their internal
functioning, funding, and other matters
of public interest.
This amendment has been criticized in manner that it acts as a
shield to political parties and their actions from public scrutiny
and accountability.[23]
3.4
Removal of fixed tenure for Information Commissioners:
One of the most crucial amendments to the
RTI act is that of removal of the fixed tenure of Information Commissioners (ICs) at the central and state levels.
Earlier, ICs had a fixed tenure of five years, and thus the accountability and diversity was maintained and it provided them with security of tenure and
ensured their independence. But the removal of
fixed tenure may lead to a situation
where ICs are vulnerable to political pressure and can be
removed arbitrarily[24] and this can lead to political dominance
which is harmful to a democratic country like India.
3.5
Protection of personal information:
One of the most controversial sections of
the RTI Act is Section 8[25], which tends to provide exemption from the disclosure of
information by public authority to the General public. The Act provides the protection of
personal information of Public authority from disclosure if its disclosure affects the
sovereignty and integrity of the country, and thus it gives
immunity or an undue advantage
to the state to escape from sharing information, and hence
it is often criticised that this power is usually misused by the government to
deny access to information and hide the information that is critical
to the functioning of the government and its policies.[26]
3.6
Non-Conformity to Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy:
It has been witnessed that the amendment was
proposed very silently, even without prior notification and discussion with the public and
this is against with the true nature of Democracy and further
in violation of the democratic principles of the country. Furthermore, it is contended that the bill
was neither discussed with MPs nor, it was brought to media for public opinion. And hence it
is violative of the 2014 policies
related to legislative consultation.[27]
Overall, the 2019 amendment came
with many drawback to the Democratic
nature of the country and these changes
has been witnessed
as a step back in India's commitment to accountability,
transparency, and the right to access to information. These amendments have been criticized by various organizations, activists, and the opposition parties, who further
demanded their repeal.
4.
BENEFITS OF THE AMENDMENTS
The Right to Information (RTI)Act acts as a
tool for general public which helps them to be
aware of every action of the state and holding all the authorities
accountable for their Action. The
Right to Information (RTI) Amendment Act of
2019 introduced some changes to the original
RTI Act of 2005. The amendment to the original act came with positive changes
like introduction of e-filing
and reduction of workload and better accountability to the
general public etc. The following
are some potential
benefits of the 2019 RTI Amendment Act:
4.1
Better management of RTI requests:
The 2019 amendment act gives power to the
central government to frame rules regarding the management of RTI requests, including putting limit on the number of requests that can be
made by an individual and the time limit for submitting a request. This
can help the government for management of the RTI process, as this helps in reduction
of can the workload of Information Commissions and to further prevent the misuse of the RTI Act.
4.2
Reduction
in the workload of Information Commissions:
The Right to Information act allows the
appropriate government for the transfer of pending RTI applications to other Information Commissions, which further promotes
reduction of the workload
on the Information Commissions. This can ensure timely disposal and can help in reducing
the backlog of RTI applications.
4.3
Protection of personal information:
The RTI act further allows for the
protection of data of individuals and personal information of individuals, including Aadhaar card
details, from being disclosed under the RTI Act. This helps in safeguarding the privacy and personal information of citizens.
4.4
Encouragement of digital filing:
The amendment act promotes digital filing
and online payment of RTI fees, making the process more efficient and cost-effective. This may help in more active
process of RTI filing where the workload
can be reduced and the system can become more accountable, transparent and
citizen friendly, thus reducing the burden on Information Commissions and promote transparency in the RTI process.
4.5
Introduction of fees for filing an appeal:
The 2019 amendment
came with introduction of fees for filing an appeal against
the decision of the first appellate authority. As we have witnessed that there are thousands of cases which are
proved to be fake and vague applications and this can lead to affect or dilute
the true nature of RTI, and thus charging the fees will help in reducing the no. of fake applications and this may discourage frivolous
appeals and ensure that only genuine appeals are filed.
In conclusion, the 2019 RTI Amendment Act[28] in India has several potential benefits,
including better management of RTI requests,
strengthening the autonomy
of the Information Commission, reducing
the workload of Information Commissions, protecting personal information, encouraging digital filing,
introduction of fees for filing an appeal, solution from the problem of fake
cases and exemption
of Intelligence and Security
Agencies from the purview
of RTI Act. Thus, we have
witnessed that every statute has both positives
and negatives and it all depends on the needs and
perception of the people who use this act as a tool to maintain the accountability of the State.
5.
CONCLUSION
Right to Information acts like a tool for
the general public in such a sense that it creates a situation where the authorities can be held liable and
accountable for their action. It is one
of the most important statutes which
directly overflows from Article 19 of the constitution of India and it acts as a natural right which flows directly from the concept
of democracy.[29] Every statute
has its own pros and cons and so does this act have its own benefits and
drawbacks. The amendment to the
original act came with many positive benefits like e-filing of RTI application and fees
procedure. But it majorly was criticised for affecting and diluting the true nature of the act. The amendment has been criticised for making the act less transparent and affecting the federal structure of the act. The
act was made to provide information and knowledge to the public related to actions of the government so that the citizens of the country can have access to the information, making the government more transparent and accountable. But the amendment to the act has weaken this
transparency feature. The feature of the good governance is the transparency and accountability, participation and legitimacy, and the objective of the RTI act was to
act as a tool of Good Governance, but it has rather been now acting as a tool
of government which makes autonomous to the government
to whether disclose
the information or not. It has been further witnessed that the RTI act has been changed
more than of what it was originally provided. The essence of
the act has vanished but still it thrives for fight of accountability, In conclusion, it depends on the citizen
of the country that how to take these amendments, and if they have more cons than the benefit,
then further action should be taken by the people of the nation to fight with the cons. India
is a democratic country and is known for its legislative systems. More than 4 million RTI are filed per year in India.
The people of the country are the power of the country
and the government should address the public in a proper
manner and thus the government should not abuse its
power and should provide the information to the general public.
[3] The Right To Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 (Act 24 Of 2019).
[12] The Right To Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 (Act 24 Of 2019), s 13.
[14] The Right To Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 (Act 24 Of 2019),
s. 13(1).
[15] The Right To Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 (Act 24 Of 2019), s 16.
[20] The Right To Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 (Act 24 Of 2019).
[22] The Right To Information Act, 2005 (Act 22 of 2005).
[25] The Right To Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 (Act 24 Of 2019), s. 8.
[26] The Right To Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 (Act 24 Of 2019), s. 8.
[27] Pre-Legislative-Consultation-Policy, available at: https://legislative.gov.in/pre-legislative-consultation-policy/ (last visited
on May 4, 2023)
Article Information
RTI AMENDMENT: INFORMATION DRIVEN OR INFORMATION CURTAILED?
Authors: SAYESHA GAMBHIR
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2023/08/30
- 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.