Right To Information Act, 2005: A Tool For Transparency
- Rhythm Garg
- Jan 8
- 7 min read
Written by: Rhythm Garg, B.A.LL.B (3rd Year), Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies (NMIMS) Chandigarh
Introduction:
The Act was passed by both Houses of Parliament in May, 2005. India’s then President Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam gave assent to the Act on 15 June 2005 and it came into force on 12 October 2005. The act aimed to promote transparency, accountability and provide the citizens with a legal tool to ask for the information from the authorities.
It helps in citizen empowerment and encourages participative democracy.The RTI Act is based on the principle that a well-informed citizen is crucial for the proper functioning of society. The act was established as a first step towards open democracy. The act seeks to bridge the gap between citizens and the Government.
Historical Evolution:
Globally Sweden was the first country to adopt the Freedom Of Information Act, 1776 after that the USA and UK also adopted the act in 1966 and 2000 . In India the RTI act, 2005 holds its significance from various grassroot movements to culminate in the Indian Legal system. The evolution of the act can be seen in three phases, the first being the pre-independence period, second being the emergence and third being the post-independence scenario.
During the colonial era the official secrets act, 1923 restricted the access of information to the public and transparency and accountability was not taken strictly. Then the Supreme Court in the case of State Of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Raj Narain held that the Right to information is a Fundamental right under Article 19 of the Constitution Of India. In 1990’s an organisation of rajasthan named Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan launched the RTI movement at the grassroot level to seek information about the Government spending especially about the wages under rural employment scheme.
After Independence Tamil Nadu was the first state to implement the RTI act in 1997 followed by states like Goa, Delhi, Rajasthan etc. Then to fulfill the purpose Freedom Of Information was passed in 2000 but it was not successful in curbing the corruption and ensuring transparency and it contained few flaws and loopholes, therefore, the revised bill was introduced as RTI act in May, 2005.
Impact of the Act:
According to the study, 94.2% of the participants believed that the RTI act has been successful in promoting transparency in the public functioning in India and 91.3% believes that it has been successful in controlling the corruption in public services by exposing the corrupt activities. Today over 130 countries have successfully applied the RTI act. Therefore, the RTI act is proven effective not only in urban areas but also in rural areas in holding the authorities accountable and more responsible towards citizens but it is subject to some flaws.
Structural framework of the act:
Section 5 of the act mandates for the formation of public and assistant public information officers and they will perform the duties like receiving requests, assisting applicants, providing or rejecting information with reason and the assisting public information officers are appointed at sub-district level to ensure easy access of information for citizens in remote areas. Section 12-17 provides for the Central information commission (CIC) and State information commission (SIS) which is headed by chief information commissioner with other 10 information officers.
Role of civil society organisations (CSOs):
Civil society organisations have played a very crucial role in advocating for RTI and ensuring its effective implementation.
Various NGOs and social activists are tasked to advocate for the right to information and spread awareness about it in remote areas also where people are not much aware of their rights.
CSOs provide adequate legal assistance as well as demand security from authorities for the whistleblowers, as they are the ones who expose the corrupt practices of public authorities to the public. There have been organisations like Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangthan and the National Campaign for People's Right to Information.
CSOs often influence the policy decisions of the authorities and they also ask for the strengthening of RTI laws. CSOs also demand for better safety protocols for the whistleblowers.
Important rights under RTI, Act:
The RTI act gave the right to citizens to ask for the information from the public information officer (PIO) in the form of requests, known as application, and the designated PIO will ensure that a citizen must get a record or information they asked. Citizens can file the application in English or the official language of that area to the PIO. The response must be given within 30 days from the date of application received but if the application involves any third party the timeframe can increase to 45 days. Under section 8 and 9 of the act there are certain exceptions to the right to information, that is, matters related to national security, personal privacy, sovereignty and certain privileged information. If the application is declined then the act also provides for the online appellate mechanism to seek redressal to ensure accountability.
These rights are completely aimed towards achieving transparency and accountability and to remove corruption from the society but the complete success is yet to be achieved as there are loopholes and some flaws in the effective implementation of the act and overall transparency
is not achieved yet in India.
Challenges in effective implementation:
The main and the big hurdle in successful implementation of RTI is the bureaucratic hurdle and the often denial of information by the authorities due to the misuse of power as some Government officials may perceive the act as a threat to their power. The threat to lives of whistleblowers and their families makes them hesitate to expose the corrupt practices of public authorities. Even if the application is declined the information commission is still weak which causes delay in getting access to the information.
In India awareness has been the problem for many years now, despite the continuous efforts by the activists, whistleblowers and CSOs we are still not able to educate the majority of the population about their rights. There have been national campaigns organised by the Government but at ground zero the problem of lack of awareness still continues. Also, there have been a lot of exceptions to the right to information which makes it less effective as most of the public officers use these exceptions to escape from providing information to the citizens. There is still a lack of a proper skill set of PIOs and even if they are properly trained there are less adequate resources. There are certain cases where due to resource constraint and unreasonable delay the effectiveness of the act gets affected.
These challenges require complete efforts from various stakeholders as the negligence in compliance with citizens Fundamental Rights can affect the Democratic system of our country. Furthermore, it becomes the utmost duty of the citizens to be educated about the policies and the rights granted to them by the Indian Legal System.
Suggestions for effective implementation:
As the success of RTI act depends on the effectiveness in the official system, there is a need to fill the vacancies at central and state information commissions but the recruitment should be on the basis of expertise and legal knowledge of the candidate. The officer should be given full autonomy along with accountability so that he can work without any hurdle or constraint. The authorities have to allocate enough resources to the enforcement commissions. In case of any non compliance there has to be a strict penalised mechanism so that the information officers can adhere to the rules and regulations of the act and if any officer denies the information then proper accountability should be there. There has to be an expansion in the coverage of RTI as there are a lot of exceptions which are often misused by the authorities, the exceptions need to be reduced. Strict provisions for the safety of whistleblowers has to be included in the act so that they do not hesitate while exposing the corrupt practices.
Sometimes the process gets overcomplicated for some people due to which they cant get access to the information they are seeking. The process needs to be simplified, and the rules and regulations must be provided with language options to increase fairness in the information system. To spread the awareness and education about the rights and duties of the citizens the base has to be strong so the education system to incorporate the right to information at the school level so that in future they are aware of their rights.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, all the stakeholders must come forward for the effective implementation of the RTI act. The right ensures that our democratic principle does not get hindered because of any misuse of power by the public authorities. The main essence of the act can only be preserved if the citizens are well informed about their rights. As we discussed there have been a lot of efforts being put in by the activists, whistleblowers and campaigns by the Government but still we are not able to achieve our desired outcomes. The reason is that the citizens are not willing to participate in the democratic system which gives the authorities an implied power to misuse their authority.
Participative democracy is the main aim behind the implementation of the act but if citizens will nor participate the act can never be successful. Therefore, a complete effort is required
by the stakeholders, in which citizens are also included. This will not only help in achieving
the democratic goal but it will also be a great push towards India becoming a developed
country.
References
Prashant D. Satpute, Implementation and Impact of Right to Information Act in India: A Comprehensive Study (2024).
Brij Mohan Dutta, The Impact of the Right to Information Act – 2005 (RTI) on Transparency and Accountability in Indian Governance: An Empirical Study (2024).
Evolution of Right to Information Act, 2005, Jus Corpus Law Journal, February 5, 2024.
Comments