Right To Information
- secrecy root cause of corruption
- india inherited colonial administrative structure
- basic objective exploit the country
- brits could continue exploitation only if complete secrecy
- Indian Evidence Act 1872 and Official Secrets Act 1923 passed to promote culture of secrecy in governance
- post independence, same legislations continued
- govt promoted even more secrecy with All India Civil Services Conduct Rules and Regulations 1959, 1964
- India opted to be welfare state and govt started implementing hundreds of welfare schemes
- by mid 1980s, realized most schemes resulted in massive corruption due to secrecy in implementation
- 1990: demand by Rajasthani villagers to know about schemes implemented by state
- got support from Majdur & Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) (an NGO led by former IAS Officer Aruna Roy)
- Finally, administration forced to furnish info demanded by villagers
- 2005: part of right based approach to development, Parliament passed RTI
- Citizens could file RTI with ministries and depts demanding info that is NOT part of section 8 of RTI
- responsibility of Public Information Officer (PIO) within stipulated period of 30 days
- if info not provided, citizens have Grievance Redressal mechanism in form of Information Commission
- These IC can receive applications and direct concerned PIO to provide info
- also have power to impose fines on ministries and depts
- in 2009, 2nd ARC submitted report regarding challenges faced in implementation of RTI
Challenges in RTI
- Official Secrets Act: passed for objective of hiding info from citizens
- promoted culture of secrecy within governance
- 2nd ARC: as long as there is Official Secrets Act, RTI can’t be implemented in letter and spirit
- recommended repeal of Official Secrets Act
- all info related to national security can be part of National Security Act and rest of info be made available to citizens under RTI
- RTI derived from Freedom of Information Act of USA
- in USA, even Top Secret info declassified after 30yr
- but in india, certain info never made public
Response of Govt
- rejected recommendations
- argued only 3% info is part of OSA
What should be done?
- realize objectives of complete transparency in administration OSA should be removed and replaced with National Secrets Act
- top secret info be made available after 30yrs
Challenges in Information Commission
- Pending cases
- ~320000 cases pending
- insufficient resources
- justice delayed = justice denied
- Credibility
- low because govt appoints retired bureaucrats as members of information commission
- Lack of Personnel
- most information commissions are functioning with insufficient staff
- CIC has only ~25% sanctioned strength
- Delay in disposal of RTI
- waiting time of around 1yr
- Status of Annual Reports
- 19 Information commissions hasn’t filed annual reports
- Understaffing of CIC
- has only 3 members, with 8 posts vacant
- Information commission can come out with orders and impose fines but no power to get order implemented
- in >90% cases, fines not paid by concerned official
Suggestions to improve RTI
- 2019 SC: Information commission vacancies should be filed without any delay
- recently, CJI commented there is deliberate tendency on part of govt to not fill in vacancies has effectively ended implementation of RTI
- 2023 SC: ruled that Central and State govt must fill in all vacancies within a stipulated period
- 2nd ARC: has recommended that to ensure credibility of Information Commission, atleast 50% of members should be from non civil services background and around 50% from NGO, Civil society etc working in field of RTI
- Information commissions should be given sufficient powers to get orders implemented by ministries and depts
- Info Commission should be given powers of Contempt of Court
Govt Response
Position of RTI in 2005
- Info Commission, even tho Statutory Body, is given status of constitution body like Election Commission
- CIC was given rank of Chief Election Commissioner and other commissioners were given rank of Election Commissioners
- Salaries were same as that of Election Commission members
- Also given security of tenure
Changes by Govt in RTI
- constitutional status is delinked as Info Commission in statutory body
- govt has downgraded rank of info commissioners and reduced info commission members to rank from Election Commissioners to Secretary
- Government has removed security of tenure
- decreased tenure of info commissioners
- earlier 5 yrs; now 3yr
- Govt delinked salaries and allowances of information commission from that of EC
=> will be reduced to mere extensions of govt dept
Misuse of RTI
2nd ARC -> misuse by pvt individual, pol party for self interest. Info used to blackmail, pol interest.
-
90% RTI filed by insiders
2nd ARC suggested amendments to section 4, wherein PIC can reject RTI application if they believe no public interest is served by providing info. 2 advantages
- prevent misuse
- reduce burden of commission
critics:
- discretionary power to deny info?
- secrety
- officials at lower level must be given power to make info public on website in real time. Can be done by amending AICS R&R 1964.
Deliberate destruction of info
- destruction by govt to esc accountability
- 2nd ARC: entire info digitized, put on website of ministry
- Many insti outside scope of RTI
- parl committee
- army
- NGO
pol party - judiciary
- 2nd ARC: bring these in ambit of RTI
Lack of awareness
-
90% of RTI applications filed by insiders
- most by urban
- NGO, civil society orgs, media, govt must take proactive measures to create awareness among rural population about RTI
- simplify procedure
- online filing
Colonial attitude of bureaucracy
- 2nd ARC: structural reforms failed due to colonial attitude of bureaucrats
- master-slave mindset
- sensitivity training imp
- Mission Karmyogi
- transparency of admin not resulted in accountability of admin
- corruption is low risk, high reward
- cuz measures not effective
- must be separate vigilance cells from lowest level to topmost to investigate corruption cases
- come out with time bound reports to ensure accountability
Protection of whistle blowers
- since 2005, hundreds of RTI activists killed
- info abt applicants should be kept secretive
- info should be encrypted
- Art 21: right to privacy (KS Puttaswamy Case), Art 19(1)(a) Right to freedom of speech & expression
- DPDP Legislation has made significant changes to right to privacy under section 8(1)(j) of RTI
- excluded all personal info from scope of RTI
- complete immunity to public officials for their actions
- conflict -> adjudicated by Data Protection Board, w/ members appt by Govt
- critics -> changes effectively ended scope of RTI cuz officials can take protection under DPDP legislation