“RTI is not only about right to know but also right to question. This will increase faith in democracy”
-Prime Minister at 10th Annual Convention of CIC (Central Information Commission)
About the author :
This article is written by Hasnath K.H, final year student of 5year integrated Bcom LL.B at Government Law College, Ernakulam. She is also an editor trainee of ljrfvoice.com.
CONCEPT OF THE RTI ACT:
The main concept of RTI (Right to Information) Act is to promote transparency and accountability in the working of the government.It further aims at empowering citizens and eliminating corruption to make our democracy work in real sense. The Right to Information Act, came in to effect since October 12, 2005, is a crucial law in India. It establishes the right to information for citizens, challenging the traditional belief that government workings should be mostly confidential. Instead, it promotes transparency, making it the norm rather than the exception. This law aims to empower citizens by providing access to information, reducing bureaucratic hurdles, and holding the government accountable. It’s a significant step towards an informed and engaged citizenry, discouraging corruption and ensuring openness at all levels of government.
INTENTION OF THE RTI ACT:
Intention of the RTI Act is to harmonize the conflict between the rights of the citizens to get information and necessity to preserve confidentiality of sensitive information. The Act is the establishment of an unprecedented regime of right to information for the citizens of the country. It strikes at the heart of the paradigm long practised by Government officials and public functionaries that ‘confidentiality is the rule and disclosure is an exception’. The Act seeks to establish that “transparency is the norm and secrecy is an exception” in the working of every public authority. Thus it aims to ensure maximum openness and transparency in the machinery and functioning of Government at all levels: Central, State and Local. The right to information is expected to lead to an informed citizenry and transparency of information which are vital to the functioning of a democracy. It will contain corruption tenable holding Governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed. The ‘People’s Right to Know’ has a long history of prolonged debates, deliberations, discussions, struggles and movements at both national and international levels.
RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT:
A citizen has a right to seek such information from a public authority which is held by the public authority or which is held under its control. A citizen has a right to obtain information from a public authority in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through print-outs provided such information is already stored in a computer or in any other device from which the information may be e-mailed or transferred to diskettes etc. The information to the applicant should ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought. However, if the supply of information sought in a particular form would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or may cause harm to the safety or preservation of the records, supply of information in that form may be denied.
In some cases, the applicants expect the Public Information Officer to give information in some particular proforma devised by them on the plea that they have a right to get information in the form in which it is sought. It need be noted that the provision in the Act simply means that if the information is sought in the form of photocopy,or if it is sought in the form of a floppy, it shall be provided in that form subject to the conditions given in the Act. It does not mean that the PIO shall re-shape the information. This is substantiated by the definition of the term right to information’ as given in the Act, according to which, it includes right to obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through print-outs provided such information is already stored in a computer or in any other device. Everywhere in the Act, the word ‘form’ has been used to represent this meaning.
Some Information Seekers request the Public Information Officers to cuil out information from some document(s) and give such extracted information to them. A citizen has a right to get ‘material’ from a public authority which is held by or under the control of that public authority. The Act, however, does not require the Public Information Officer to deduce some conclusion from the ‘material’ and supply the ‘conclusion’ so deduced to the applicant. It means that the Public Information Officer is required to supply the ‘material’ in the form as held by the public authority, but not to do research on behalf of the citizen to deduce anything from the material and then supply it to him.
Related case laws:
1)M.P Varghese v. Mahatma Gandhi University, 2008 (1) Civil LJ 916
The issue involved in this case between principles of private aided colleges in the state is that whether aided private colleges would come under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005. The court held that, the term “public authority”would take in only government and those instumentalities of state which would come within the definition of “state” under Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
2)Bhagat Singh v. Chief Information Commissioner, 2008 (64) AIC 284.
Right to information is a fundamental right. Exemption from releasing is granted only if it will jumped process of investigation or prosecution of offenders. Authority withholding information must show satisfactory reasons therefore.
In this case, Bhagat singh was not able to demonstrate that CIC malafidely denied the information sought. Therefore, a direction to the CIC to initiate action under section 20 of the Income Tax Act, cannot be issued.
SCOPE OF THE RTI ACT:
Citizenship under the Act is exclusively for natural persons, granting them the right to access information from public authorities without the need for explanations. Firms, companies, and corporate entities do not fall under the definition of citizens. The Public Information Officer (PIO) or public authority is prohibited from questioning the applicant’s reasons for seeking information. In addition, a citizens need not give reasons for asking for a particular information from any public authority. Should multiple individuals request the same information, PIOs are obligated to provide it to all requesters. Additionally, citizens can request information already disclosed as per the Act’s self-disclosure requirements, and public authorities must furnish such information upon application.
Information
Information is any material in any form. It includes records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form. It also includes information relating to any private body which can be accessed by the public authority under any law for the time being in force.
Exception from disclosure of Information:
Notwithstanding anything in this Act, there’s no obligation to give any citizen information that would prejudicially affect India’s sovereignty, security, or economic interests. This includes data forbidden by courts, breaching parliamentary privilege, and impacting third-party competitiveness. Fiduciary information disclosure requires public interest justification. Exemptions also cover personal data unrelated to public interest unless overridden by higher public interest. Public authorities may allow information access if public interest outweighs protected interests. Information about events two decades old must be provided upon request. Appeals against decisions can be made under Section 19 by the third party receiving a notice.
Notwithstanding the Official Secrets Act, a public authority may allow access if public interest in disclosure outweighs harm to protected interests. Information regarding occurrences, events, or matters from twenty years before a request is made under Section 6 shall be provided. The Central Government’s decision on the computation date is final, subject to usual appeals. Information received in confidence from foreign sources or endangering life, safety, or the source of information for enforcement or security purposes is exempt. Cabinet papers, including Council of Ministers’ deliberations, shall be made public after the decision is complete. Matters under these exemptions specified shall not be disclosed. Personal information unrelated to public activity or causing unwarranted invasion of privacy may be disclosed if larger public interest justifies it. Information not denied to Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person.
A notice under sub-section (3) shall include a statement allowing the third party to prefer an appeal under Section 19 against the decision.
Protection of action taken in good faith:
The denial of information on grounds of interpretation of law is covered by “good faith”.–Kishur J. Aggarwal v. Indian Rare Earth’s Ltd. [Dept. of Atomic Energy] Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2006/00015, decided on 2.6.2006 (CIC).In this case, the appellant requested information under RTI 2005, but the PIO refused, citing a different interpretation of the law. The decision states that the denial was in good faith, but questions the PIO’s judgment about the appellant’s intentions. The Commission directs the PIO to provide information and advises caution in handling future RTI requests. The parties will receive notice of the decision at no cost.
No suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this Act or any rule made thereunder.
Plea against imposition of penality:
In Vijay Jha v. Dept. of Scientific & Industrial Research [DSIR), Appeal Nos. CIC/WB/A/2006/00121, 122, 123 & 124, decided on 17.5.2006 (CIC).:
The facts of this case is that Dr. Vijay Jha from IP Extension, New Delhi, submitted four applications to CPIO Vimal Kumar Varun DSIR, seeking information on various points related to TEPP and PATSER plan programs. The responses received were deemed inadequate by Dr. Jha, leading him to appeal to the appellate authority. Despite no response, he pursued a second appeal. The CPIO plea of being under staffed is liable to be accepted as reasonable cause for delay in directing him to now provide the information sought after raising the necessary recourses at appellant’s expenses.
Third party information and its disclosure:
Third party in relation to the Act means a person other than the citizen who has made request for information. The definition of third party includes a public authority other than the public authority to whom the request has been made. Disclosure of Third Party Information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, is exempt from disclosure. Such information should not be disclosed unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information. In regard to a third party information which the third party has treated as confidential, the Public Information Officer should follow the procedure as given in the chapter ‘FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERS’. The third party should be given full opportunity to put his case for non-disclosure if he desires that the information should not be disclosed.
Suo motu disclosure:
Public authorities must share extensive information through various communication channels, with the internet being a key platform. Section 4(1)(b) of the Act outlines sixteen categories of information that every public authority must publish. This includes details about the organization, functions, and duties, as well as information about officers and employees, decision-making processes, and rules and regulations. Furthermore, it covers the disclosure of budgets, subsidy programs, and electronic records. The government may specify additional categories. Importantly, this information must be regularly updated, at least annually, reflecting any developments. Compliance with these disclosure requirements is not optional; it’s a statutory obligation for all public authorities, especially crucial when information is shared online.
