INTRODUCTION

India is a democratic country where the government is accountable to its people. With the enactment of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the government has enhanced its transparency and engagement with the people. The government is now obligated to provide explanations to the people of India for its decisions and actions. This has significantly improved transparency and responsibility within the country.

Before the enactment of this law, there was no mechanism in place through which the government could be held accountable for its actions. People lacked access to information regarding critical matters such as the policy-making process and the allocation of tax funds which directly impacted them. The initiative to enact this Act was initially led by a grassroots-level organization known as the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), and it later gathered support from activists, the media, legal professionals, and other concerned citizens.

RIGHT TO INFORMATION: GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

India is not the first country to give the Right to information to its citizens. Sweden has the oldest law, called “the Swedish Freedom of the Press Act” adopted in 1766, which made the government records accessible to the public subject to exemptions defined in the Secrecy Act.

After the formation of the United Nations, the concept of Freedom of Information began to spread in the world. Article 19 of the “Uniform Declaration of Human Rights”, 1948 necessitates the right to seek and receive information to all persons.

Countries like Finland, Norway, Denmark, the USA, France, Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the UK and many more began to adopt this concept and enacted laws to give freedom of information to their citizens. However, the concept of secrecy remains a barrier to the complete access of information to the public.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND INDIAN CONSTITUTION

Freedom of Information was not explicitly given in the constitution of India. It was recognized by the Supreme Court as a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (a) as a part of Freedom of Speech and Expression by judicial interpretation. Consequently, citizens in India now possess the entitlement to access all information relating to public actions conducted by public officials. The disclosure of information must be the rule and secrecy an exception when reasonably justified.

INDIAN JUDICIARY ON RIGHT TO INFORMATION

1. State of U.P. v. Raj Narain[i]:

· The election of Mrs. Indira Gandhi in the General Elections, in 1974 was challenged by Mr. Raj Narain. He demanded certain documents from the government to prove his case but the government claimed that it had a privilege to not disclose certain documents demanded by him.

· It was held by SC that the Right to Information is a part of the Fundamental Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution.

2. S.P. Gupta v. President of India[ii]:

· In this case, the government claimed the privilege of non-disclosure of certain documents regarding the policies of transfer of Judges.

· The Supreme Court determined that the decision to disclose specific documents should involve a balance between the Citizen's Right to Information and the State's prerogative to safeguard Confidential Information.

3. Dinesh Trivedi, M.P. and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.[iii]:

· The SC held that every citizen has the right to know about the affairs of the government and to participate in the policy formulation but there are certain limitations in the exercise of this right.

ACTS BEFORE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005

Freedom of Information Act, of 1966 was passed by the Congress government and came into force in the year 1967. This act was amended in the year 1974. The act was again amended by the Freedom of Information Reform Act of 1986. Then, the Freedom of Information Act, of 2002 was enacted.

RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005

The Freedom of Information Act, 2002 was repealed by the RTI Act, 2005. However, the various state laws were not repealed by this act, so the state laws operate along with the Central Act, and in case of any conflict, the Central Act prevails.

The objective of the RTI Act is to achieve equilibrium by granting the people of India access to official information while simultaneously safeguarding confidentiality in cases where disclosure could potentially harm public interests. This right to information is extended to all Indian citizens, encompassing access to information covered by the act, and which is either held by or under the jurisdiction of any public authority.

WHO CAN SEEK INFORMATION

· The citizens of India have a right to seek information under Section 3 of this act.

· An office-bearer of an association or Union, who is also a citizen of India can also seek information provided the application is made in their capacity as a citizen. This was held in the case of “Sreekumar S. Menon v. S.D. Pillai, 2007.” [iv]

· A company or firm cannot seek information under this act, even if the RTI application is signed by its representative because the RTI is given to only citizens and a jurist person like a company or firm and its representative in its official designation cannot be treated as a citizen.

RIGHTS OF THE INFORMATION SEEKERS

The rights given to the citizens of India under the RTI Act include:

1. Right to Information. [Section 3]

2. To choose the medium of request for obtaining information: Written or Electronic Means. [Section 6 (1)]

3. To choose the language of request. [Section 6 (1)]

4. Not stating any reason for requesting the information or providing any personal details except those necessary for contacting the applicant. [Section 6 (2)]

5. Right to be immediately informed about any transfer of request of information to another public authority. [Section 6 (3)]

6. Right relating to reviewing the decision about the amount of fees charged, or the form of access provided. [Section 7(3)(b)]

7. Assistance in accessing records, if the applicant is disabled. [Section 7(4)]

8. All fees are waived for below-poverty line (BPL) applicants. [Section 7(5)]

9. All fees are waived if a public authority fails to supply information within the specified time limits. [Section 7(6)]

10. Knowledge of reasons for rejection, the period within which an appeal can be made, and particulars of appellate authority (AA). [Section 7(8)]

11. Making of complaint to the Central Information Commission (CIC) / State Information Commission (SIC), as the case may be if:

a) Unable to submit a request to Public Information Officer (PIO)/ Additional Public Information Officer (APIO) [Section 18(1)(a)]

b) Refused access to information [Section 18(1)(b)]

c) Not given a response within the time limit [Section 18(1)(c)]

d) Required to pay unreasonable fee [Section 18(1)(d)]

e) Provided incomplete, misleading information or false information [Section 18(1)(e)]

f) In respect of any matter relating to accessing records [Section 18(1)(6)]

12. Can prefer an appeal [Section 19(1) and Section 19(3)]

WHO IS OBLIGATED TO GIVE INFORMATION

The RTI Act requires the Public Authority to give information on request to the citizens. Public authority has been defined in Section 2(h) and it consists of two parts:

· The first part states that public authority means any authority, body or institution of self-government established or constituted by or under the Constitution, by an enactment made by the Parliament or the State Legislature. It could also be formed by a notification issued or an order by the appropriate Government.

· The second part states that the term 'public authority' includes bodies which are owned, controlled, or substantially financed, directly or indirectly, by funds provided by the appropriate Government, and non-government organizations substantially financed, directly or indirectly, by funds provided by the appropriate Government.

· If a body satisfies the requirement of the second part, then conditions of the first part need not be satisfied to determine whether it is a 'public authority'.

DUTIES OF THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES

· Maintain all its records, duly catalogued, and indexed, in a manner and form which facilitates the right to information, and computerize within reasonable time. [Section 4(1)(a)]

· Publish within 120 days from the enactment of this Act, 16 types of information, and thereafter update these publications every year. [Section 4(1)(b)]

· Publish all relevant facts while formulating important policies which affect the public. [Section 4(1)(c)]

· Provide reasons for its administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to affected persons. [Section 4(1)(d)]

· To provide as much information, Suo motu, to the public, through various means. [Section 4(2)]

· To disseminate information widely, taking into consideration the cost-effectiveness, local language, and so on. [Section 4(3) and Section 4(4)]

· Within 100 days of enactment, designate PIOS in all administrative units/offices, as may be necessary. [Section 5(1)]

· To designate an Assistant Public Information Officer (APIO) within 100 days of enactment at the divisional level/sub-district level, to receive the applications. [Section 5(2)]

· To transfer misdirected requests within five days from the receipt of the application, if information is held by another public authority or the subject matter is more closely connected with the functions of another public authority, and inform the applicant immediately about such transfer. [Section 6(3)]

Further, the responsibilities of public authority as ordained by the Central Information Commission (CIC) / State Information Commission (SIC) are:

· CIC/SIC has the power to command a public authority to take any such steps as may be necessary to secure compliance with the provision of this Act, including:

i. By providing access to information, if so requested, in a particular form;

ii. By appointing a Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) or State Public Information Officer (SPIO), as the case may be;

iii. by publishing certain information or categories of information;

iv. by making necessary changes to its practices in relation to the maintenance, management, and destruction of records;

v. by enhancing the provision of training about the right to information for its officials;

vi. by providing it with an annual report in compliance with clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 4;

[Section 19(8)(a)]

· To compensate the complainant for any loss or other detriment suffered. [Section 19(8)(b)]

HOW TO ACCESS INFORMATION

1. Identify the concerned public authority and send the application to the Public Information Officer (PIO)/ Additional Public Information Officer (APIO) along with the Application fee. (No fee for Below Poverty Line)

2. PIO has 30 days from the date of receipt to provide information on payment of fee, if any, or reject the request for reasons given in Section 8 and Section 9 of the Act.

3. PIO has 48 hours to provide information if it is sought for concerns like the life or liberty of a person.

4. If the RTI is accepted,

· PIO must examine whether a third party is involved. If so, it will follow the procedure given in Section 11.

· If an additional fee is to be paid, the PIO must inform the applicant, providing details of calculations and his right to appeal.

· PIO is to provide information within 30 days.

· Information is to be provided for free if, the time limit of 30 days exceeds.

5. If the RTI is not accepted,

· PIO must inform the applicant of the reasons for rejection, the period within which an appeal can be made, and the particulars of the Departmental Appellate Authority (AA).

· First Appeal is made to AA within 30 days if aggrieved by the decision of PIO or no communication within the stipulated time by PIO.

· Departmental Appellate Authority should dispose of the appeal within 30-45 days.

· If the appeal is accepted, AA directs PIO to give information to the appellant.

· If the appeal is not accepted, a Second Appeal is to be made to (CIC) / (SIC) within 90 days.

· If accepted, CIC/SIC shall ask PIO/ Public Authority to give information.

· If not accepted, the Citizen has a right to appeal to the High Court/ Supreme Court.

INFORMATION EXEMPTED FROM DISCLOSURE

The RTI Act 2005 does not provide access to all forms of information.

· Section 8 (1) of the RTI Act provides a list of 10 categories of information which is exempted from disclosure:

a) disclosure affecting the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific, or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign States or lead to incitement of an offence.

b) expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal or the disclosure of which may constitute contempt of court.

c) the disclosure causing the breach of privilege of Parliament or the State Legislature.

d) information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party.

e) information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship.

f) information received in confidence from foreign Governments.

g) the disclosure endangering the life or physical safety of any person or identifying the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes.

h) disclosure impeding the process of investigation, apprehension, or prosecution of offenders.

i) cabinet papers including records of deliberations of the Council of Ministers, Secretaries, and other officers.

j) disclosure affecting personal information which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual.

· However, under Section 8 (2) all such exemptions can be waived if a public authority decides that public interest in disclosure outweighs the harms to protected interests.

· Another ground for rejection is under Section 9, where access to information would involve an infringement of copyright subsisting in a person other than the state.

· Section 24 of the act says that it will not apply to the intelligence and security organizations as specified in the second schedule.

· However, these organizations must give information relating to allegations of corruption and human rights violations.

IMPACT ON GOVERNANCE OF INDIA

Since Independence, the people of India have given the governance of the country to its democratically elected government. The government has the task of not only handling the public money but also ensuring the rights of the people and effective governance. The RTI Act has a major impact on the good governance of the country by ensuring:

· Greater Transparency

· Increased Public Participation in the governance

· Accessibility to the information

· Accountability of the government and public officials to the people

· Equity and Inclusiveness

· Effectiveness and Efficiency

CONCLUSION

A democratic country like India needs to have an accountable government. Before the decisions of the courts and then the formation of the act, the accountability of the public authorities was a mere concept which was not implemented in the world's largest democracy.

The Right to information given to the citizens of India is a fundamental right and is now freely exercised by the citizens following the RTI Act, of 2005. This has led to transparency and accountability but the restrictions on the name of secrecy which is many times misused by the government need to be checked and regulated.

References

1. Sudhir Naib, The right to information in India (2013).

2. Parag Agrawal & DR. MRINAL RASTE, Layman’s Legal Guide of Right to Information (2017).

3. N. K. Jain & M. L. Khurana, Right to information concept, law and Practice (2010).

[i] State of U.P. v. Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 865.

[ii] S.P. Gupta v. President of India, AIR 1982 SC 149.

[iii] Dinesh Trivedi, M.P. and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., (1997) 3 SCR 93.

[iv] Sreekumar S. Menon v. S.D. Pillai, 2007 SCC OnLine CIC 726.