Letter and spirit

An analysis by this paper found that government agencies and institutions are increasingly finding ways to decline information sought under the Right to Information Act (RTI), 2005. The experience of citizens in using the RTI to access information has been largely less than satisfactory. Essentially, the Government and its agencies are finding ways to ensure that the RTI Act becomes an ineffective tool available to the citizens, thus defeating the very purpose for which it was enacted in the first place. It is unfortunate that a law that would have helped lower corruption in public offices and increase transparency in the functioning of government and thus help improve governance has become hostage to political and bureaucratic insecurity. Section 8(1) of the RTI Act together with its clauses have often been misused to deny information requests. This sweeping provision allows the government to deny any information that it perceives to be prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of the country, its security, strategic and economic interests or lead to incitement of an offence and would disproportionately divert resources of the public authority.

This is a pity. The RTI Act has helped expose large scams at the central and State level in the past. The Adarsh Housing Society scam, which led to resignation of the then Maharashtra chief minister Ashok Chavan, the Commonwealth Games scam and even the 2G scam were exposed as the result of RTI applications. But such exposes also had unintended consequences. Decision making in the Government came to a standstill particularly during the UPA government’s second term. Scams exposed by RTI Act queries gave a handle to opposition parties to attack the ruling alliance and precipitate its downfall.

The RTI Act was revolutionary and designed to be more effective than the Freedom of Information Act enacted by the NDA government in 2002. The Act empowered citizens to hold public functionaries accountable for their actions. It held the promise of cleaning up governance, but that hope proved short-lived. Political parties ensured that they were not covered under the purview of the RTI Act through an amendment in 2013 and therefore were not answerable for their actions to ordinary citizens. Dedicated RTI activists have been verbally and physically abused, and some have even been killed. The government needs to accept that some discomfiture may be the inevitable outcome of any effective use of the Act, but the benefits — by way of changing how politicians, bureaucrats and lower level functionaries conduct themselves and the resultant improvement in governance standards — far outweigh the trouble. Any government that is committed to democratic values should improve transparency and be more accountable to the people it ostensibly exists to serve. It needs to take the lead in setting the right example by embracing the RTI Act in letter and spirit.

COMMENT NOW