Monday, 11 July 2016

Right to Information (RTI) Act: Boon or Bane?


·         The RTI Act has been the most empowering legislation for citizens
·         It has initiated the vital task of redistributing power in a democratic framework
·         In other words, the law gives citizens power to control and hold government responsible for their activities
·         It protects everyone from being wrongly or inappropriately informed or misinformed.
Issue:
·         However, this paradigm shift in the locus of power is not well received by some of the public functionaries. There have been consistent efforts by the powerful to denigrate the law.
·         The latest attack on the legislation was witnessed recently in the Rajya Sabha, with several members of Parliament, across party lines, demanding amendments to the act.
Why there are demands for amendments to the RTI Act?
·         Many MPs have alleged that the RTI is being widely misused
·         It is used as a tool to blackmail public functionaries
·         They argued that government servants are unable to take decisions objectively for fear of the RTI
·         A large number of frivolous and vexatious RTI applications are being filed resulting in a negative impact on the efficiency of the government
·         Some argued that many are using the RTI to ask questions on sensitive issues from the government such as national secrets related to missile programs and international relations.
·         An extra burden to the authorities
(Note: These assertions, however, are not backed by data or evidence)
Is RTI really misused?
Two national studies on the implementation of the RTI was carried out by the RTI Assessment and Advocacy Group (RaaG) in collaboration with the National Campaign for Peoples’ Right to Information (NCPRI)
As part of the assessments, 20,000 RTI applications filed to different public authorities in the country were collected, of which detailed analysis of a randomly selected sample of 5000 applications was undertaken.
The result of these studies/assessments tell a completely different story:
·         Less than 1 per cent of the RTI applications analysed pointed towards the misuse of the law in terms of frivolous or vexatious information requests.
·         The majority of applicants sought basic information about decisions and action taken by the government, norms related to the functioning of public authorities and the use of public resources.
·         In fact, the studies showed that close to 70 per cent of the RTI applications sought information that should either have been made public proactively or communicated to the applicant without needing to file an RTI application.
·         The analysis also revealed that a little over 1 per cent applications were voluminous, in terms of requiring a lot of information, which could divert time of public servants.
·         Again, a majority of the voluminous applications were asking for information that should have been disclosed proactively.
Key take away from the studies –
Clearly, the poor compliance by public authorities with statutory provisions related to proactive disclosure of information is forcing people to file applications for information that should be publicly available to them. Even a government-sponsored nation-wide study in 2009 did not find any evidence to flag misuse.
Is RTI data used as a tool to blackmail or harass anyone?
·         As the above assessment shows, most of RTI applicants sought information that should either have been made public proactively or communicated to the applicant without needing to file an RTI application.
·         It raises the question – In any case, how can objective government information, obtained under the RTI, be used to blackmail or harass anyone?
·         On the other hand, if there is some wrongdoing, the RTI applicant would be rendering a service to the society by exposing it.
Is RTI compromising national security?
·         Some MPs had claimed that anyone can use the RTI to ask questions on sensitive issues from the government such as national secrets related to missile programs and international relations, which would prejudicially affect the security of India.
·         The above assertion that the RTI can be used to compromise national security is totally unfounded.
·         Section 8 of the RTI Act spells out the restrictions to peoples’ right to information. It exempts disclosure of various categories of information, including information, which would prejudicially affect the security of India and its relations with a foreign state, and personal information, which has no bearing on public activity or interest.
Conclusion:
·         The Right to Information Act 2005 is hailed as a revolution in India’s evolution as a democracy. It empowers the ordinary citizen who has hither-to been armed with only his vote, with the tools of information that propel government decisions.
·         When the poorest of the poor put votes, elect their representatives and also pay taxes (indirect taxes), then why there is hesitation to be answerable to them?
·         The RTI Act is premised on the idea that democracy requires an informed citizenry.
·         Members of Parliament would be well advised to look at the evidence before mulling amendments to it.


No comments:

Post a Comment