Project Report on:

Significance of Right to
information in
democracy

Submitted to: Submitted by:

Ms. Sugandha Hemlata
B.A.LLB (Hons)
Roll no. – 82/15
(13060)
Section – ‘B’
Semester – 7th
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Success comes to those who strive for it. To achieve one’s goal, one puts in a lot of hard
work and efficiency. In this process, one takes all the encouraging and helping hands of the
people.

I would like to convey my heart full thanks to Ms. Sugandha, my teacher and guide, who
guided me through this project and also gave valuable suggestions and guidance for
completing this project. She provided me with this opportunity and whose immaculate
knowledge was a key in completion of this project.

I owe my regards to the entire faculty of the Department of Legal Studies, from where I have
learnt the basics of Law and whose informal discussions, intellectual support and able
guidance was a beacon light for me in the entire duration of this work. I would also like to
thank staff of the UILS library and A.C. Joshi Library for availing me all the relevant data.

So, with the concrete efforts and utmost honest intentions, I hereby present this project.

- Hemlata
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1
ORIGIN OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ........................................................................... 2
GLOBAL OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................... 2
POSITION IN SWEDEN .................................................................................................. 2
THE STATUS OF RTI IN THE TWO MOST DEVELOPED DEMOCRACIES OF THE
WORLD ............................................................................................................................ 2
POSITION IN UNITED KINGDOM................................................................................. 3
POSITION IN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ............................................................ 4
RTI IN VARIOUS INTERNATIONAL LEGAL INSTRUMENTS ....................................... 6
UNITED NATIONS .......................................................................................................... 6
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, 1948 .......................................... 6
THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS, 1968 .... 7
THE COMMONWEALTH................................................................................................ 7
ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES(OAS) ........................................................ 7
EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ...................................................... 7
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS FACILITATING RIGHT TO INFORMATION IN
INDIA................................................................................................................................... 9
RTI AND DEMOCRACY .................................................................................................. 10
IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF RTI: .................................................................................. 12
OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT, 1923 AND RTI .................................................................. 12
SALIENT FEATURES OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005. ............................ 13
GOOD GOVERNANCE AND DEVELOPMENT .............................................................. 15
GOOD GOVERNANCE ................................................................................................. 15
DEVELOPMENT............................................................................................................ 15
SIGNIFICANCE OF RTI .................................................................................................... 16
PROBLEMS IN IMPLEMENTING RTI ACT .................................................................... 20
SUGGESTIONS FOR EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF RTI ACT .......................... 22
RECENT JUDGMENTS ..................................................................................................... 24
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 26
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................... 27
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

A.C - Appeal Cases

All. - Allahabad

A.G. - Attorney General

AIR - All India Reporter

Cal. - Calcutta

Cri. L.J. - Criminal Law Journal

FSL - Foresenic Science Laboratory

Hon. - Honorable

IPC - Indian Penal Code

J. - Justice

Mad - Indian Law Reports Madras series

No. - Number

p. - Page

s. - Section

SC - Supreme Court

SCC - Supreme Court Cases

SCR - Supreme Court Reporter

v. - versus

Vol. - Volume
 TABLE OF CASES

Bennett Coleman vs. Union of India 10

Common Cause v. High Court of Allahabad and Anr. 20

Conway v. Rimmer 3

Dinesh Trivedi v. Union of India 11

Lamont v. Post Master General 4

R. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex P. Simms, 3

Shahzad Singh v. Department of Posts 20

Stanley v. Georgian 4

State of UP v. Raj Narain 11

The Registrar, Supreme Court of India v. R S Misra 19

Vishwas Bhamburkar v. PIO, Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd. 19

 INTRODUCTION

The term Democracy refers to a government chosen by the people, whether it is direct or
representative. Democracy originally has two distinguishing features: firstly the allotment of
ordinary citizens to government offices and courts and secondly the assembly of the citizens.
Accountability and transparency are the two eyes of democracy. People are the master and
they have right to watch the performance and business of the government. They have right to
know that how they are being governed. Veil of secrecy restricts the vision of the citizens to
see the working of government. In the present scenario knowledge has become the most
valuable resource.

Corruption and abuse of power are the inevitable fall outs of an unaccountable system of
governance. The right to information when vested in people can act as a deterrent against
corruption and abuse of power. The right to information is a means to ensure open
government and to empower the people. The Right to Information Act, 2005 has
categorically disclosed information related to public authorities to provide for setting out the
practical regime of right to information for citizens in order to promote transparency and
accountability in the working of every public authority.

Right to Information (RTI) is usually used as a synonym for democracy. This is a tool to
strengthen citizens’ sovereignty. Sweden is the first country to enact the first RTI law in the
world in 1766. So far (until the end of 2017), 119 countries in the world have enacted RTI
laws. This is also one of the main components of human rights. Developed countries,
particularly the European countries were the first ones to champion the RTI. While Asian
countries have also practised RTI laws pretty well, Latin American countries are well ahead
in its implementation.

The RTI is all about making citizens informed. Informed societies mean a lively and
functioning democracy. The RTI empowers people to seek information from the government
and public organizations and ask for government documents and their copies. Through the
RTI, citizens know about government decisions and the limitations of the country and the
government. RTI promotes transparency and accountability. Citizens feel honored when they
get to exercise their right to have access to the source of information.

1
 ORIGIN OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION

GLOBAL OVERVIEW

The world in the 21 st century has marked many a strides and paradigm shifts in the
understanding, analysis and contextualization of the various cultures of the world affairs. RTI
which is the cynosure of this discourse is not something new. In fact there is a long history at
international level towards the attainment of this right and mobilization of the masses for
achieving it. With development of human ideals and establishment of democratic
governments in most of the civilized countries, this topic came to the fore. Many international
organizations and regional groups recognized this right to be part of their systems.

Over 100 countries in the world have implemented some form of legislation related to Right
to Information but Sweden is the first country to enact law relating to this i.e. Freedom of
Press Act of 1766. India is the 48 th country to implement Right to Information. Other major
countries which have implemented right to information are America, UK, France, Canada,
Japan, Australia, New Zealand etc.1

POSITION IN SWEDEN

Swedish Freedom of Information Law (a literal translation of the native term indicates the
Freedom of Printing Act) passed in the year 1766 is considered to be the oldest and earliest
legislative recognition of RTI. This law was passed by Sweden. A large number of countries
have followed the same line and have enacted access laws after it. For example, Finland in
1950, Denmark in 1950, Norway in 1970, and United States of America in 1966 enacted such
laws in order to facilitate information access.

THE STATUS OF RTI IN THE TWO MOST DEVELOPED DEMOCRACIES OF THE

WORLD

U.S.A and England.

This analysis is very essential because India was colony of England and U.S.A.is oldest
democracy.

1
RTI retrieved from <https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-history-of-the-RTI-Act> accessed on 1st November,
2018 at 5 PM.

2
POSITION IN UNITED KINGDOM

India was the colony of Britain and many laws are the creation of that very time, so it is very
obvious to see the position in England. Democracy has been the basic tenet of England since
ages but 'secrecy' is emphasized rather than openness. This is due to the innate tendency of
legislature and executive to enshroud policies instead of making it transparent. England has
enacted Freedom of Information Act, 20052. But basically, the present law is contained in the
Official Secrets Acts of 1911, 1920, 1939 3. Judiciary in England has approved of openness in
Government.

Conway v. Rimmer, 4

The House of Lords established its jurisdiction to order the disclosure of any document. In
this case the court refused the crown privilege. Deciding this case Justice Lord Reid, said that

“The document must be produced in the court for deciding the case and held that it is not
crown privilege but it is public interest privilege”.

However, it was also emphasized that balance between conflicting interests of secrecy and
publicity should be maintained. The court held that the entire class of the document cannot be
pleaded as privileged document and first time classified the document in two parts as class
document as a privileged document and content document as non privileged one.

Keeping in view the desirability of “openness” of government affairs in a democratic society,

the Franks committee recommended a repeal of section 2 of the 1911 Act, and its
replacement by the Official Information Act .The United Kingdom has enacted Freedom to
Information Act 2000. Most of the countries of the Western Europe have now such
legislations.

R. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex P. Simms, 5

Importance of freedom of expression in English law can be ascertained by the observation of

Lord Steyn in this case which goes as following:

2
S.P. Sathe, Right to Information, Lexis Nexis Butterworths.
3
Avinash Sharma, "Right to Information : A Constitutional Perspective", Vol. VIII Nyayadeep, see at pg. 121.
4
(1968) A. C. 910.
5
(2000) 2 LR 115(AC).

3
"Freedom of speech is the lifeblood of democracy. The free flow of information and ideas
informs political debate. It is a safety valve; people are more ready to accept decisions that go
against them if they can in principle seek to influence them. It acts as a brake on the abuse of
power by public officials. It facilitates the exposure of errors in the governance and
administration of justice of the country...."

POSITION IN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

India and America is very common in one thing that India has the largest democracy in the
world and America has the oldest one. America and democracy are generally synonymous.
America apparently proclaims it to the torchbearer of the plethora of democratic rights that
ought to be the part of a true democratic framework. The same applies on the dispensation of
information too. Antipathy towards the inherent secrecy is therefore not a surprising attribute
exhibited by the Americans. Schwartz observes, "Americans firmly believe in the healthy
effects of publicity and have a strong antipathy to the inherent secretiveness of government
agencies."

Two main statutes which confer RTI:

The Freedom of Information Act, 1966 and The Administrative Procedure Act, 1946

The Constitution of America does not deal specifically with RTI. However, such right is
considered to be corollary of the First Amendment freedoms.

Lamont v. Post Master General, 6

A provision of a statute was held to be a restriction on the unfettered exercise of First

Amendment Rights and hence was declared invalid by the Supreme Court.

Stanley v. Georgian7

It was observed that freedom of speech necessarily protects the right to receive information.

6
14 Lawyer Edition 2d. 398 (1965).
7
22 L. Ed. 2d. 24. 542 (1969).

4
The American government passed Freedom of Information Act, 1966 which gives every
citizen a legally enforceable right to excess to government files and document which the
administrations may be tempted to keep confidential.

If any person is denied this right, he can seek injunctive relief from the court. The Act
ensures access to government information in three broad ways:

(a) Publication in the Federal register;

(b) Making available for inspection and copying certain certified information and

(c) Making available reasonably described records on request.

5
 RTI IN VARIOUS INTERNATIONAL LEGAL INSTRUMENTS

Various international instruments such as treaties, charters etc have recognized RTI as right
that ought to be available to the people. All the citizens have a right to decide, either
personally or by their representatives, as to necessity of the public contribution, to grant this
freely, to know to what use it is put; and to fix the proportion, the mode of assessment and of
collection and the duration of taxes.

UNITED NATIONS

The right to access information is firmly set in the body of international human rights law. It
is enshrined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). United
Nations accepted right to information right from its beginning in 1946. The General
Assembly resolved that: "freedom of information is a fundamental human right and the
touchstone for all freedoms to which the United Nations is consecrated."

United Nation Principle on the Freedom of Information:

These are the following principles propounded by the UNO in order to ensure the freedom of
information:

1) Maximum disclosure
2) Obligation to publish
3) Promotion of open government
4) Limited scope of exceptions
5) Processes to facilitate access
6) Costs
7) Open meetings
8) Disclosure takes precedence
9) Protection for whistle blower

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, 1948

Right to information is a human right under Article 19 of Universal Declaration of Human

Rights. Article 19 of the Universal declaration of Human Rights of 1948 states that,
"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to

6
hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas
through any media and regardless of frontiers."

THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS, 1968

Article 19 of the Covenant states as following:-

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to
hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas
through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

THE COMMONWEALTH

The Commonwealth association of 54 countries affirmed the existence of RTI by

emphasizing the participation of people in the government processes. The law ministers of
the Commonwealth at their meeting held in Barbados in year 1980 stated that 'public
participation in the democratic and government process would be most meaningful when
citizens had adequate access to official information'.

ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES(OAS)

American Convention on Human Rights was adopted by the Organization of American States
(OAS) in 1969. This international treaty is legally binding in nature. Article 13 of the
convention reads as follows;-

(l) Everyone has the right to freedom of thought and expression. This right shall include
freedom to work, receive and impart information and ideas, of all kinds, regardless of
frontiers, either orally, in writing, in print, in the form of art, or through any other medium of
one's choice.

Clause 2 states that exercise of such right may sometimes be subject to liabilities or
restrictions if it compromises the national security or contravenes the right available to others.

EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

Clause 1 of Article 10 of the Convention states that, 'Everyone has the right to freedom of
expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions, and to receive and impart
information and ideas without interference by public authority and irrespective of frontiers.

7
However, clause 2 provides that such right is subjected to such formalities, conditions,
restrictions or such penalties as are prescribed by law, and are necessary in a democratic
society, and if it harms the national interest or territorial integrity.

However European Court of Human Rights interpreted Article 10 strictly. That is to say it
was held that freedom to information prohibited the Government from restricting a person
from receiving information. But, at the same time it does not provide any positive right to a
person for obtaining the information. This interpretation was based on the difference between
'freedom' and 'right'.

Most of the above discussed international instruments do not deal with RTI directly. Their
role however is not diminished at all by this fact. Like a first step they showed the world
community a direction to be explored in order to materialize the democratic value of RTI,
thereby making the systems transparent and world more amicable for the people.

8
 CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS FACILITATING RIGHT TO
INFORMATION IN INDIA

The incorporation of fundamental rights as enforceable rights in the modern Constitutional

documents as well as in the internationally recognized charter of human rights, emanate from
the doctrine of natural law and natural rights. In India at the time of national movement,
freedom fighter promised to the people of India that they will provide the natural rights as
fundamental rights through the “Suprema lex”, that is Constitution to the people of India.
These fundamental rights are similar to human rights as declared by the United Nation in
1948.

The Right to information is indisputably a fundamental right. It is a facet of “right to speech

and expression” as provided in art 19(1) (a). Right to know has increased the efficiency of
decision making process. It has set a transparency and determines accountability in the
working of public department. Reduction in corruption in public department is due to the
implementation of Right to Information Act, 2005. It is relevant to refer here that in a
government of responsibility like ours, it is elementary that citizens ought to know what their
government is doing. They have a right to know every public Act, everything that is done in a
public way, by their public functioning of the government. It has also stated that exposure to
public gaze and scrutiny is one of the surest means of achieving a clean and healthy
administration.

The concept of an open government is said to be the direct emanation from the right to know
which seems to be implicit in the right of speech and expression under article 19(1) (a). The
citizens have the right to decide by whom and by what rules, they shall be governed and they
are entitled to call on those who govern on their behalf , to account for their conduct so that a
citizen, prepared to pay requisite fee is entitled to ask for copies of public documents, to the
inspection of such documents.

Rights are the interests which are recognized and protected by law. The sanctity of right
enhances if it is adopted by the Constitution of a country. In Indian context, where the
common people were subject of negligence for centuries, constitutional principles are the
only hopes that can ensure freedom of all sorts. Information has a pivotal role in
strengthening public by making them knowledgeable.

9
 RTI AND DEMOCRACY

India is the largest democracy in the world. Democracy is the government of the people, by
the people and for the people. Hence, right to information needs to be ensured in a democracy
for a citizen to understand the functioning of government. In India, the Right to information
Act fulfils the objective to bring in social accountability and transparency in the functioning
of government. It’s an attempt by the government to make themselves more accessible to the
citizens and to gain public participation since these are crucial for citizen-government
interaction.

PROCESS OF INFORMATION SEEKING

Freedom of expression is a basic foundation of democracy. It is a core freedom without

which democracy could not exist. The term includes not only freedom of speech and press
but also freedom of thought, culture and intellectual inquiring. Freedom of expression
guarantees everyone’s right to speak and write openly without state interference, including
the right to criticize injustices and illegal activities. It guarantees the right to public by which
they can offer opinions of any kind, to advocate change, to give the minority the opportunity
to be heard and became the majority and to challenge the rise of state tyranny by force of
words. 8

The conceptual roots of democracy lie in Articles 23 and 25 of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, 1948 and in Part III and Part IV of the Constitution of India. In this regard,
Right to Information is part of the constitutional framework enshrined as freedom of speech
and expression.

The legislative intent of the Right to Information Act was to empower citizens to promote
transparency and accountability in the working of every Public Authority, reduce the gap

8
Priyanka Agarwal and Ghanshyam Deora, “RTI and Democracy in India”, 2016

10
between the information provider and the information seeker, enhance efficiency in
administration of public authorities, mitigate corruption and promote good governance.

Bennett Coleman vs. Union of India9

The Supreme Court for the first time declared RTI to be part of Article 19 (1) (a). It held that
the Newsprint Control Order of 1972-1973 issued under the Essential Commodities Act,
1955 to be ultra vires of Article 19 (1) (a). Hon’ble Court held that “It is indisputable that by
freedom of the press is meant the right of all citizens to speak, publish and express their
views. The freedom of press embodies the right of the people to read”.

Dinesh Trivedi v. Union of India,10

The Apex court dealt with the right to information. Emphasizing the importance of this right,
Court observed “Democracy expects openness and openness is concomitant of a free society
and the sunlight is the best disinfectant.”

State of UP v. Raj Narain,11

The Apex Court held that “In a government of responsibility like ours, where all the agents of
the public must be responsible for their conduct, there can be but few secrets. The people of
this country have a right to know every public act, everything that is done in a public way by
their public functionaries. They are entitled to know the particulars of every public
transaction in all its bearing”.

Free flow of information is essential for the health of a democratic society. This is aptly
expressed in the preamble of the Right to Information Act, 2005:
“Democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information which are vital
to its functioning and also to contain corruption and to hold Governments and their
instrumentalities accountable to the governed.”

Much before the legislative enactment our Judiciary, in a progressive interpretation of the
Constitutional provisions, had paved the way towards delineating the Right to Information.
The process, conceptually, was initiated when Parliament enacted the Freedom of
Information Act, 2002. This was followed by the present Act that came into force on 12

9
AIR 1973 SC 106
10
(1997) 4 SCC 306
11
1975 SCR (3) 333

11
October 2005. Its legislative intent was to empower the citizen to promote transparency and
accountability in the working of every Public Authority, reduce the gap between the
information provider and the information seeker, enhance efficiency in administration of
public authorities, mitigate corruption and promote good governance.

There can be little doubt that this is one of the most empowering and progressive legislations
passed in the post Independent India. It is often said that India’s RTI Act is one of the world’s
best law with an excellent implementation track record. It has salient features such as clear,
time-bound implementation schedules with penal provisions for non-compliance, a minimal
exceptions clause, and a well structured appeals system. These provide for better governance,
and impact on the very nature of governance itself.

IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF RTI:

 Until the passage of this Act, the disclosure of information held by public authorities
in India was governed, exclusively, by the Official Secrets Act, 1923. It was a legacy
of the British colonial rule, encouraged secrecy and opaqueness in administration and
was designed to deny information about government activities to the people.
 The RTI Act is different from other enactments in its operation. For most other laws,
the executor of the law is government; and the citizen is normally required to comply
by these laws. The RTI Act is the very opposite. Here, the citizen is the executor and
the government has to act in response to a directive from the citizen. It thus reverses
the roles of the public and the government. This is a new situation and requires getting
used to by the administrators.
 A third radical provision of the Act is that the information seekers need not give a
reason for demanding the information held by public authority or prove his/her locus
standi for it. This allows activists and civil society organizations to take up issues on
behalf of the marginalized and the un-empowered.

OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT, 1923 AND RTI

During Lord Curzon’s times, the Indian Official Secrets Act (1904) was enacted mainly to
restrict the freedom of the press. This act was replaced with Official Secrets Act, 1923 to
govern all matters of secrecy and confidentiality in governance in India. The law also
provides a framework for dealing with espionage, sedition and other assaults on the unity
and integrity of the nation. Because of mistrust between British administration and people,

12
the law had inculcated the culture of secrecy in India. However, the Official Secrets Act has
not been totally overridden by the Right to Information Act, 2005.

According to the RTI Act of 2005, in case of a clash with the Official Secrets Act, the public
interest will prevail. The section 8(2) of the RTI Act says, “Notwithstanding anything in the
Official Secrets Act, 1923, a public authority may allow access to information, if public
interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests.” 12

In India, the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) also said that “The
Official Secrets Act, 1923 should be repealed.” But the recommendation to repeal OSA was
rejected by the Government giving argument that it is the only law to deal with cases of
espionage, wrongful possession and communication of sensitive information detrimental to
the security of the State.

The ARC had also recommended that Departmental Security Instructions should be amended,
and ordinarily, only such information should be given a security classification which would
qualify for exemption from disclosure under the RTI Act. But the government said that it was
not possible to classify documents on the basis of various Sections of the RTI Act.13

Corruption is the greatest enemy of good-governance and causing harm to democracy and
development. RTI is a tool to fight against corruption. RTI empowers the people of India
against administrative corruption, unresponsive attitude, and irregularities. Every citizen of
India is empowered to question, review, audit, assess and examine the government decisions
to ensure that decisions are taken in public interest. Through RTI, corruption can be exposed
and it can also bring to light those officials who are not doing their duties efficiently.
Particularly in India, the RTI has been seen as part of the anti-corruption. People can check
any misappropriation and ask information about project and plans. Citizens can now get a
better picture of where their taxes are being used and how. They have the right to keep a
check on misappropriation of national and state funds. There is a greater possibility of scams
coming to light and this itself prevents large scale corruption to a certain extent.

SALIENT FEATURES OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005.

 Every citizen possesses the Right to Information.

12
https://www.gktoday.in/gk/official-secrets-act-versus-right-to-information-act/
13
Ibid.

13
 The term ‘information’ means any mode of information in any form of record,
document, circular, press release, email, electronic data etc.

 RTI covers inspection of work, document, record and its certified copy and
information in any electronic mode.

 Applicant can obtain information within 30 days from date of request in a normal
case. If it is a matter of life and liberty of person, information can be obtained within
48 hours.

 Certain information is prohibited from disclosure for security reasons.

 Penalty for not providing information is Rs. 250 per day but the total amount of
penalty should not exceed Rs 25,000.

 Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions are to be

constituted by Central Government and State Governments respectively.

 No court can entertain any suit, application or other proceedings in respect of any
order made under the Act.

14
 GOOD GOVERNANCE AND DEVELOPMENT

GOOD GOVERNANCE
accountability, transparency, participation are the key elements of good governance, RTI
enhances accountability and transparency in governance by giving ''voice'' to citizens and
promotes ''informed'' participation in decision making.

DEVELOPMENT
The key elements of development are:

a) sustainability and
b) Inclusivity.

RTI boosts sustainable development by curbing corruption in developmental work and by

promoting effective and efficient use of resources. The unearthing of various scams like 2G
and related changes made in govt functioning like transparent auction procedures in this case
are an example.

RTI boosts Inclusivity by efficient delivery of public goods and services- unearthing
corruption and leakages in govt schemes like MGNREGA, PDS, etc are an example.

To strengthen the use of RTI, to promote good governance and development, government
needs to make suo-motto disclosure of basic information a norm together with spreading
awareness about the instrument of RTI among citizens.

15
 SIGNIFICANCE OF RTI

Access to public information is a requisite for the very functioning of democracy, greater
transparency, and good governance. In a representative and participatory democratic system
like India, the citizen exercises its constitutional rights, i.e., the rights to political
participation, the vote, education, freedom of expression and free access to information etc.
The Right to Information Act (RTI) 2005 is an effective tool that checks and holds various
bodies, agencies, and departments of the government accountable to the public and exhibits
transparency in their activities and minimizes corruption.

Right to information (RTI) came as a weapon of transparency and a medication to enhance

accountability. It is a tool of participatory development which has positive impact on good
governance and socio-eco service delivery. Significance of RTI & its relationship to good
governance and development can be understood as:

1) A crucial step towards a deeper, more meaningful democracy. All human rights
depend on the basic right to know, to demand accountability.

16
2) RTI makes disclosure a norm and secrecy an exception.

3) RTI also is important in promoting and upholding human rights.

4) Empowerment of the common man: Before enactment of RTI act, people remain
ignorant in terms of the ways and means through which they can obtain their entitled
rights from the concerned departments legally. But after enactment of this act, the
entire range of common man in the nation has been empowered by such an initiative
in which they have got the full rights to be informed about anything that affects their
life directly or indirectly and the responsible bodies have to answer them positively.

5) Easy accessibility to information: The RTI has created a very concrete and easy mode
of spreading information of all kind from where pertinent information will be received
by only the person concerned and this will in turn result in easy accessibility to
information on one hand and time conservation of all. The right to know and easy
access of government information helps the people to understand the limitations of
government at different levels. The availability of information also helps to foster in
development process and it is a symptom of true and mature democracy.

6) Greater TRANSPARENCY which gives citizens right to access information regarding

rules, regulation, plans & expenditure of govt. this helps in trust building among
citizens for their govt. RTI has helped in checking leakage in PDS, MGNREGA.
7) Improved citizen-government partnership will lead to successful implementation of
plans and policies, which in turn will improve quality of life – life with dignity &
satisfaction. Role of RTI is remarkable in checking drop-out, teacher attendance,
quality of education & infrastructure under Sarva Siksha Abhiyan.
8) Greater ACCOUNTABILITY, since all public authority is required to provide reasons
for its administrative and quasi - judicial decision to affected person so no scope for
arbitrary decision. Under NRHM, health services remained on paper due to lack of
accountability of staff but RTI has improved the situation.
9) Check on CORRUPTION since culture of secrecy is shortened and weakened by RTI.
Those who didn’t wanted to get stained in broth of corruption, they too were stained.
Now with check on it, people can live with honesty & integrity. Issues of
constructions as pond, well on paper only has reduced and real time development is
taking place.

17
  The first remarkable battle to fight corruption by accessing information from
public authorities started in Devdungri village, Rajasthan. Aruna Roy, an IAS
Officer left her job to work for the betterment of village people who were
often cheated in their wages because of their illiteracy. Observing the plight of
rural people, Aruna Roy along with Nikhil Dey and Shankar Singh founded
the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) in 1987. MKSS entered a new
phase, breaking new ground with experiments in fighting corruption through
the methodology of ‘Jan Sunwais’ or public hearings. This movement shook
the very foundations of traditional monopoly, arbitrariness and corruption of
state bureaucracy. It was because of RTI Act that official records were made
available which helped in organizing the Jan Sunwais. 14
 Other example of how RTI helps in tackling corruption. In 2010, K.S. Sagaria,
a resident of Kushmal village in rural Orissa, filed an RTI application seeking
information on the number of ponds constructed in his village under the
Government’s National Wage Employment Scheme for below poverty line
families. The information he received revealed that - the ponds had never been
constructed even though money had been allocated and spent. Following
complaints from villagers, the local administration was forced to take
disciplinary action and suspend the officials involved in the pond scam. 15
 Case of Panchampur village, Uttar Pradesh – It was a case of teacher of
primary school in Panchampur village of Banda district (UP). The teacher
hardly made an appearance in the classroom. Various NGO’s collectively
made the villagers aware of right to information and asked them to file an RTI
application asking about his whereabouts, and also questioned the
responsibility of the Primary Education Department in such a situation.
Immediate action was taken: a new school teacher was appointed to the village
school, and an enquiry was ordered against the absconder teacher. 16
10) RESPONSIVENESS under RTI the public authority has to provide reasons for its
administrative and quasi-judicial decisions to the affected person.

14
RTI retrieved from <shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/54477/9/09_chapter%202.pdf> accessed on
1st Novemeber, 2018 at 5PM.
15
Right to Information retrieved from < http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l373-Right-to-Information---
An-Anti-Corruption-Tool.html > accessed on 1st Novemeber, 2018 at 5PM.
16
RTI and Corruption retrieved from < https://www.huffingtonpost.in/2015/10/13/rti-10-years8277290.html> 1st
Novemeber, 2018 at 5PM.

18
 11) PARTICIPATION TO CITIZENS involvement of affected groups and communities
in design and implementation of projects and it is supplemented by mandating
proactive disclosure of information by public authority.
12) SOCIAL AUDITS - Social audits refer to a legally mandated process where potential
and existing beneficiaries evaluate the implementation of a programme by comparing
official records with ground realities. In simple words, RTI plus Public Hearing is
equal to Social Audit. It is based on the principle that democratic governance should
be carried out, as far as possible with the consent and understanding of all concerned.
It values the voice of stakeholders, including marginalized groups whose voices are
rarely heard. Social auditing is taken up for the purpose of enhancing local
governance, particularly for strengthening accountability and transparency in local
bodies. Social audit is no longer a choice. Along with other transparency and
accountability platforms, it is a legal, moral, and democratic necessity.
The objectives of Social Audit include - Proper utilization of funds, Conformity of the
developmental activity with the stated goals, Better quality of services, Involvement
of people in developmental activities to ensure that money is spent where is it actually
needed, Reduction of wastages, Reduction in corruption, Awareness among people,
Promotes integrity and a sense of community among people etc.17
13) EQUITABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH - Economic development is enhanced by the
right to information. As most experts agree, free information is crucial to the
development of a modern economy which is capable of engaging in the globalized
international marketplace. It is for this reason that most of the International Financial
and Trade Institutions, such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund have
repeatedly endorsed the importance of transparency and have included the
implementation of effective right to information legislation as a key practical
mechanism for promoting transparency.
14) It promotes Inclusive Development And Empowers Citizens at the same time
revealing and reducing chances of corruption. e.g. In the case of NREGA , 2G scam
and Commonwealth Scam.
With RTI we have to go long way, we still need to work upon RTI & in future we expect a lot
for good governance and development from it.

17
Social Audit retrieved from <http://www.theshillongtimes.com/2017/07/22/social-audit-an-element-of-
transparency-and-participatory-democracy.com> accessed on 1st November, 2018 at 6 PM.

19
 PROBLEMS IN IMPLEMENTING RTI ACT

A mere enactment of RTI act will not ensure the right as such. There is a requirement of
effective implementation of RTI act which ensures a greater transparency and accountability.
But some challenges and problems has emerged in implementation of the RTI act such as
ineffective record system, problem of illiteracy, limited use of IT, delay in accessing
information, etc. which are explained here under:
1) Lack of assistance in filing the application: Under Section 5(3) of RTI Act, it is
expected of the PIO to assist citizens in drafting RTI applications. However, it was
observed in a survey that more than 49% of the applicants did not receive any
assistance from the concerned PIO while drafting and filling RTI applications.
2) Low Level of Training: An in-depth understanding of the RTI Act is a basic
requirement of a PIO to discharge duties effectively. However it was observed that
many of the PIOs had not received RTI training and the frequent transfers of the PIOs
adds to the challenge. This places additional work-load on the training institutes
entrusted with providing RTI training.
3) Ineffective Record Management System: Record management system plays a vital
role in timely disposal of a RTI application. But in India the system was not so
effective which leads to delay in processing of RTI applications. As per Section 4(1a)
of the Act, a Public Authority needs “to maintain all its records duly catalogued and
indexed in a manner and form which facilitates the Right to Information under this
Act and ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerised are, within a
reasonable time and subject to availability of resources, and connected through a
network all over the country on different systems so that access to such records is
facilitated”.
4) Illiteracy and Poverty: Illiteracy and poverty is another major challenge before
successful implementation of Right to Information act. Right to Information act has
does not have any meaning for a Person who does not have enough money to live,
who is not educated and who does not have freedom. In fact, their first requirement is
the right to live (right to eat, right to work and right to shelter) and then Right to
Information.
5) Limited Use of Technology: The limited use of technology has hindered effective
implementation of RTI act. Except in a few states no effective IT system have been

20
 establish to monitor and report on the disposal of application by public authorities.
Isolated IT solutions have been developed by a few Departments independently but
these systems are just restricted to tracking the status of RTI applications.
6) Time constraint: There are many offices of PIO where the access of common man is
very prolonged and it becomes very hectic to carry out the process. It is mandatory to
provide the information in the given time frame of 30 days. Since the information
system of the organization is not integrated, therefore it becomes difficult to provide
the information in the given time.
7) Uneven Implementation of RTI: The implementation of RTI act is uneven. It is not
equally implemented to all the states. Therefore, awareness level also differs from
state to state. In states like Arunachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Punjab the awareness
level about RTI act is high, on the other hand awareness of people in Gujrat, Madhya
pradesh, Jharkhand and UP is not high. Moreover different rules for different states
especially on fees and costs make the RTI filing ineffective.
8) Lack of Monitoring and Review mechanism: One of the most important roles of the
Information Commission is to monitor and review the Public Authority and initiate
actions to make them comply with the spirit of the Act. However this has been one of
the weakest links in the implementation of the Act. It is acknowledged and
appreciated that the Information Commissions have been primarily been spending
most of their time in hearings and disposing of appeals. However monitoring the
Public Authority for compliance of the Act is also an important aspect of the role of
the Information Commission, which could result in reducing the number of appeals.
9) Too Many Personal Queries: CIC Satyananda Mishra talks about the problems from
a shortage of manpower to the volume of frivolous queries. About 75% of RTI
queries are personal in nature, which is a concern that is contrary to what was
imagined when the act was passed by Parliament in 2005. The country will benefit
more if a large number of RTIs are filed on issues of larger public interests.

21
 SUGGESTIONS FOR EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF RTI ACT

Right to Information Act, 2005 was enacted on 15 June 2005 and was come into force from
12 Oct.2005. In India the act is implemented in just 4 months, which is low as compared to
the similar acts in other countries. Due to the increase in request for the information and the
lack of preparedness for the act, different types of organizations are facing difficulties due to
the implementation of RTI Act, 2005. Therefore it is necessary to make some changes in the
RTI act for its effective implementation. Here are some suggestions in this regard:

 Inclusive Information Management System: A comprehensive Information

Management System should be developed by each public authority for storage and
retrieval of data and information that may be shared with anyone who seeks to inspect
the records and use the information for development purposes. Use of information
technologies would not only facilitate faster dissemination of information but would
also reduce the costs of servicing and sharing information.
 Proper Coordination: There should be proper coordination among state information
commissioner and departments for the effective implementation of RTI act. It is a
recognized fact that for enabling and effective implementation of RTI act, the central
and state information commissions need to strengthen their technical and IT
(Information technology) capability.
 Huge Fund for Publicity: As stated above due to ignorance, most of people have not
heard about RTI act. In view of high illiteracy among the poor, a multimedia approach
should be adopted to educate and train people of varied linguistic backgrounds. To
tackle this issue government should allocate huge fund for publicity budget of RTI
act. However, this fund should be spent through central Information commission.
 Appropriate Control Mechanism: The role of the Information Commission has to
go beyond the hearing of the appeals. As per the Act, they are expected to issue orders
to the Public Authorities to carry out their duties as per the mandate of the Act.
However till the time Information Commission assumes the role of ensuring the
compliance of the RTI Act by the various PAs, there would not be any control
mechanism. The State Government has to play a facilitative role to the Information
Commission through issuance of supporting rules or orders to the Public Authorities.

22
 Supportive Role of Government: The role of the Centre or State Government should
be to facilitate the Public Authorities in implementation of the Act. This can happen
through providing support to Public Authorities for training, development of software
applications, e-Training modules, generating awareness amongst citizens etc.
 Safeguards Mechanism: Certain safeguards should be introduced to discourage
frivolous and vexatious requests so that the system is not overloaded, and discipline
and harmony are not jeopardized. A roadmap should be charted out for effective
implementation of RTI Act in the Legislature and Judiciary at all levels.

23
 RECENT JUDGMENTS

The Registrar, Supreme Court of India v. R S Misra (2017)

Facts: In this case, the Respondent was holding the post of Postgraduate Teacher and his
services were terminated on allegations of sexual harassment against him. The Respondent
challenged his termination before the Central Administrative Tribunal and thereafter before
the High Court and Supreme Court. However, the Respondent’s challenge was dismissed by
all the Forums. Thereafter, the Respondent in 2010 sought information by way of an RTI
application as to why his petition before the Supreme Court was dismissed and in application,
the Respondent stated that the said SLP (Special Leave Petition) had been decided against the
principles of natural justice.

Held: Court held that no litigant can be allowed to seek information through an RTI
application as to why and for what reasons the Judge had come to a particular decision or
conclusion. Since both RTI Act and the Supreme Court Rules aim at dissemination of
information, the RTI Act does not prevail over the SCR. That the legislature is not competent
to take away the judicial powers of the Court by statutory prohibition. The legislature cannot
make any law to deprive the courts of their legitimate judicial functions conferred under the
procedure established. 18

Vishwas Bhamburkar v. PIO, Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd. (2018)

Facts: In this case, the Central Public Information Officer, New Delhi has raised suspicion
about the citizenship of the applicant without explaining why he was suspecting. That the
CPIO failed to justify any proper reason regarding the denial of information, as he could not
site any clause of exception under Section 8 (exemption from disclosure of information)
or Section 9 (grounds for rejection to access in certain cases) of Right to Information Act,
2005.

Held: It was held that RTI information cannot be denied for lack of Aadhaar Card. 19

18
https://www.vakilno1.com/legal-news/recent-cases-on-rti-act-in-india.html
19
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5a8821d84a93263ddf458d25

24
Shahzad Singh v. Department of Posts (2018)

Facts: In the case, the Central Information Commission noted that the Respondent
Department’s contention that concerned files are not traceable proves the fact they had it in
their possession, which binds them to provide the information by searching the same. The
Commission also observed that frequent reference to ‘missing files’ as an excuse to deny the
information is a major threat to transparency, accountability and also major reason for
violation of Right to Information Act.

Held: Court held that “missing files excuse” being around, it will be futile to talk about
implementation of Right to Information Act, 2005. The claim of ‘missing files’ indicates
possibility of deliberate destruction of records to hide the corruption, fraud or immoral
practices of public servants, which is a crime under Indian Penal Code, 1860.20

Common Cause v. High Court of Allahabad and Anr. (2018)

The Supreme Court of India directed all the government authorities to ensure that the fee for
a Right to Information (RTI) application does not exceed 50 rupees and the fee for
photocopying is not more than 5 rupees. With regard to the requirement of disclosure of
motive for seeking information, the Court ruled, “No motive needs to be disclosed in view of
the scheme of the Act”.

20
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/69711632/

25
 CONCLUSION
Right to Information is a powerful tool that strengthens democracy and promotes good
governance by enhancing the capacity of citizens to participate in the process. Right to
Information is deemed as a basic prerequisite of good governance. Right to Information and
Good governance are two sides of the same coin. Good governance is characterized by
transparency, accountability and responsiveness. Human security, shelter, food, environment
and employment opportunity are all attached with Right to Information. In the absence of
information on these issues, people can’t live a dignified life and will remain ever a
marginalized group in the society. RTI is a powerful instrument to protect the fundamental
rights of people.

Indian Parliament has passed Right to Information Act, 2005 to make government
accountable, responsible, efficient and transparent in order to lead to good governance of the
country. Access to information by the public is the essential element of good governance.

Democracy revolves round the basic idea of citizens being at the centre of governance - rule
of the people. Also, since the government is run on behalf of the people, they are the owners
and have a right to be informed directly. The basic tenets of the Act have been implemented,
the institutional mechanisms are in place, and are being used by citizens as a tool to bring in
transparency and accountability at all levels of Governance. While the Civil Society
Organizations and Media can act as pressure points, most of the correctives need to be carried
out by the Government and Information Commissions. There is a need for a sustained mass
awareness campaign, need for greater voluntary disclosure of information held with public
Authorities, need to rid ourselves of the old mindset regarding secrecy of government
processes and transactions and the need for person demanding information under the RTI to
be emboldened and secure.

However, the efficiency of law does not depend on its content but on its proper
implementation. Government has to be an open book. Then only the RTI Act can be
considered a step towards ensuring a stronger and vibrant democratic process in India.

26
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources:

Legislative-.

 Right to Information Act, 2005

Secondary Sources:

Books Referred-

 Durga Dass Basu, Commentary on the Constitution of India, Lexis

Nexis Butterworths Wadhwa, (2011).
 Dr. M.P.Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, Lexis Nexis Butterworths
Wadhwa, 6th Edition (2010).

 Agarwal, Priyanka and Deora, Ghanshyam, “RTI and Democracy in

India”, 2016

 Rao, Prof. “Law relating to Right to Information, 1 st Edition, 2009.

 Pandey, J.N., Constitutional Law of India, Central Law Agency, 2001

Paperback.

 P.K. Saini, R. K. Gupta, Right to Information Act, 2005:

Implementation and Challenges, Deep and Deep Publications, (2009).
Webliography:

 http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=146976
 https://www.academia.edu/26352174/RTI_and_Democracy_in_India_
RTI_and_Democracy_in_India
 https://thehimalayantimes.com/opinion/right-information-tool-
strengthen-democracy/
 http://jespnet.com/journals/Vol_1_No_2_December_2014/13.pdf
 http://www.insightsonindia.com/2016/04/12/8-discuss-significance-
right-information-relationship-good-governance-development/
 https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-ab&q=pdf

27