Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005

Context

The Satark Nagrik Sangathan’s 2023-24 report has brought attention to issues with the RTI Act, highlighting the pressing need for reforms.

Overview of the RTI Act 2005

The RTI Act, enacted in 2005, grants citizens the right to request information from public authorities, promoting transparency, accountability, and participatory governance while combating corruption.

Significance of the RTI Act 2005

• Exposing Corruption: RTI has played a key role in uncovering major scandals such as the Commonwealth Games (CWG) scam and the Coal Allocation scam.
• Increasing Executive Transparency: By facilitating access to information, the RTI has helped expose inefficiencies and leakages in government operations like the Public Distribution System (PDS) in Uttar Pradesh.
• Fostering Democratic Participation: Over six million RTI applications are filed annually, enabling citizens to demand accountability from public authorities.
• From Secrecy to Openness: The Act mandates proper record-keeping and information-sharing practices, prompting many departments to publish records proactively to reduce RTI queries.
• Judicial Oversight: Courts have used the RTI Act to uphold citizens’ right to information, as seen in the challenge to the electoral bonds scheme.

Challenges to the RTI Act

• Delayed Appeal Disposal: In 14 information commissions, resolving appeals or complaints can take over a year. In states like Chhattisgarh or Bihar, fresh appeals may not be addressed until 2029.
• Lack of Penalty Enforcement: Penalties are imposed in only 5% of eligible cases, weakening accountability and discouraging compliance.
• Appointment of Retired Bureaucrats: Many information commissioners are former bureaucrats or politically connected individuals, resulting in reluctance to enforce transparency.
• Vacancies in Information Commissions: Seven out of 29 commissions were non-functional last year due to unfilled positions.
• Misuse of RTI: RTI is sometimes exploited for personal gain, harassment, or to pressure public authorities, rather than serving the public interest. Frivolous requests may be filed for publicity or to trouble officials.
• RTI vs. Official Secrets: Some government functions require confidentiality, such as national security or public order. For instance, disclosing details about Rafale aircraft procurement could compromise sensitive military information.
• Conflicts with Privacy Rights: The RTI Act has sometimes clashed with the right to privacy, such as in the government’s decision to withhold information on electoral bonds to protect donor privacy.
• Low Public Awareness: Marginalised groups, including rural women and SC/ST/OBC populations, are often unaware of their RTI rights. A 2019 study revealed that only 15% of rural women knew about RTI.
• Executive Apathy: The 2019 amendment to the RTI Act reduced the autonomy of Information Commissions, reflecting a lack of enthusiasm by the executive branch toward RTI.
• Exclusion of Political Parties: Political parties remain outside the RTI’s purview, hindering transparency in their financial operations.

Way Forward

• RTI as a Democratic Pillar: The Supreme Court must continue to uphold RTI as an essential democratic right, as evidenced by its stance on electoral bonds.
• Local Language Accessibility: All RTI-related documents should be made available in local languages to increase understanding and participation across India’s diverse population.
• RTI Education: Incorporating RTI education into school curricula will help promote active citizenship and foster a culture of accountability in future generations.
• Inclusion of Political Parties: To improve transparency, political parties should be brought under the RTI Act, making their operations and finances more accessible to the public.
• Code of Conduct for Information Commissioners: A code of conduct should be established to ensure information commissioners uphold ethical standards and remain accountable in their decision-making.
• Autonomy of Information Commissions: Preserving the independence of Information Commissions is critical for maintaining democratic values and ensuring the effective implementation of the RTI Act.
• Proactive Disclosures: Government departments should proactively publish information through official websites and public platforms, making it easily accessible to citizens.
• Strengthening the Election Commission: Enhancing the Election Commission’s powers could lead to greater accountability in political processes, particularly in campaign financing.
• Filling Vacancies: Following the Supreme Court’s directive, it is crucial to promptly fill vacancies in information commissions to ensure their proper functioning and uphold transparency.