The right to information is a fundamental right under Article 19 (1) of the Indian Constitution. In 1976, in the Raj Narain vs the State of Uttar Pradesh case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Right to information will be treated as a fundamental right under article 19.
The Supreme Court held that in Indian democracy, people are the masters and they have the right to know about the working of the government Thus the government enacted the Right to Information act in 2005 which provides machinery for exercising this fundamental right Significance of the RTI Act The RTI Act, 2005 empowers the citizen to question the secrecy and abuse of power practised in governance.
It is through the information commissions at the central and state levels that access to such information is provided. RTI information can be regarded as a public good, for it is relevant to the interests of citizens and is a crucial pillar for the functioning of a transparent and vibrant democracy.
The information obtained not only helps in making government accountable but also useful for other purposes which would serve the overall interests of the society. Every year, around six million applications are filed under the RTI Act, making it the most extensively used sunshine legislation globally.
These applications seek information on a range of issues, from holding the government accountable for the delivery of basic rights and entitlements to questioning the highest offices of the country.
Using the RTI Act, people have sought information that governments would not like to reveal as it may expose corruption, human rights violations, and wrongdoings by the state.
The access to information about policies, decisions and actions of the government that affect the lives of citizens is an instrument to ensure accountability.
The Supreme Court has, in several judgments, held that the RTI is a fundamental right flowing from Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution, which guarantee to citizens the freedom of speech and expression and the right to life, respectively.
Recent Amendments :
The RTI amendment Bill 2013 removes political parties from the ambit of the definition of public authorities and hence from the purview of the RTI Act. The draft provision 2017 which provides for closure of case in case of death of applicant can lead to more attacks on the lives of whistleblowers.
The proposed RTI Amendment Act 2018 is aimed at giving the Centre the power to fix the tenures and salaries of state and central information commissioners, which are statutorily protected under the RTI Act. The move will dilute the autonomy and independence of CIC. The Act proposes to replace the fixed 5-year tenure with as much prescribed by the government.
Criticism of RTI Act:
One of the major set-back to the act is that poor record-keeping within the bureaucracy results in missing files. There is a lack of staffing to run the information commissions. The supplementary laws like the Whistle Blower’s Act are diluted, this reduces the effect of RTI law.
Since the government does not proactively publish information in the public domain as envisaged in the act and this leads to an increase in the number of RTI applications. There have been reports of frivolous RTI applications and also the information obtained have been used to blackmail the government authorities.
Right To Information Act vs Legislations for Non Disclosure of Information Some provisions of the Indian Evidence Act (Sections 123, 124, and 162) provide to hold the disclosure of documents.
Under these provisions. head of department may refuse to provide information on affairs of state and only swearing that it is a state secret will entitle not to disclose the information. In a similar manner no public officer shall be compelled to disclose communications made to him in official confidence.
The Atomic Energy Act, 1912 provides that it shall be an offence to disclose information restricted by the Central Government. The Central Civil Services Act provides a government servant not to communicate or part with any official documents except in accordance with a general or special order of government. The Official Secrets Act, 1923 provides that any government official can mark a document as confidential so as to prevent its publication.
Conclusion:
The Right to Information Act has not achieved its full objectives due to some impediments created due to systematic failures. It was made to achieve social justice, transparency and to make an accountable government. This law provides us with a priceless opportunity to redesign the processes of governance, particularly at the grassroots level where the citizens’ interface is maximum.
It is well recognized that the right to information is necessary, but not sufficient, to improve governance. A lot more needs to be done to usher in accountability in governance, including protection of whistleblowers, decentralization of power and fusion of authority with accountability at all levels.
As observed by Delhi High Court that misuse of the RTI Act has to be appropriately dealt with; otherwise the public would lose faith and confidence in this “sunshine Act”.
Subcribe on Youtube - IGNOU SERVICE
For PDF copy of Solved Assignment
WhatsApp Us - 9113311883(Paid)
0 Comments
Please do not enter any Spam link in the comment box