RTI at 20: Transparency on the Decline

RTI Act at 20 shows declining transparency due to vacancies, weak enforcement, and new privacy laws undermining citizens’ right to information.

RTI at 20: Transparency on the Decline

Syllabus: Governance (UPSC GS II)
Source: FL

Context

The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 has completed 20 years. However, activists and experts warn that it is losing its strength due to administrative neglect, vacant posts, weak enforcement, and the impact of the new Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDPA), 2023.

About the RTI Act, 2005

Purpose:
To empower citizens to seek information from public authorities, promote transparency, and ensure government accountability.

Salient Features:

Three-tier mechanism: Public Information Officers (PIOs), First Appellate Authorities, and Central & State Information Commissions (CIC/SIC).
Proactive disclosure: Section 4 mandates public display of budgets, policies, and expenditure details.
Time-bound delivery: Information must be given within 30 days (48 hours in urgent cases).
Penalty provision: Up to ₹25,000 for delay or denial of information.
Equality principle: Information accessible to Parliament must also be accessible to citizens.

Achievements Over Two Decades

Citizen empowerment: Over 2.5 crore RTI applications filed since 2005—giving citizens a direct tool to question governance.
Exposure of corruption: RTI queries helped uncover scams such as 2G Spectrum, Commonwealth Games, and Adarsh Housing.
Improved accountability: RTI has strengthened transparency in tenders, fund allocation, and service delivery.
Landmark rulings: CIC orders brought the PMO, RBI, and even the CJI’s office under RTI, setting global benchmarks.
Inclusive governance: Helped marginalized citizens access welfare benefits like pensions and ration cards.

Challenges and Decline

Vacancies and delays: Pending appeals take years; Telangana’s backlog equals 29 years of hearings.
Political influence: Appointments to commissions often lack transparency, reducing independence.
Weak enforcement: Only 1.2 % of defaulting officers penalized—encouraging non-compliance.
Legal dilution: The RTI (Amendment) Act 2019 gave the Centre control over tenure and pay of Commissioners.
Impact of DPDPA 2023: Section 44(3) restricts disclosure of “personal information,” undermining public accountability.
Withholding of data: Key datasets (unemployment, COVID-19, crimes) are not released—creating a “no-data” culture.
Judicial restraint: Courts show increasing deference to the executive, weakening RTI’s enforcement spirit.

Way Forward

Fill vacancies: Immediate appointments in CIC/SICs as directed by the Supreme Court (2019).
Ensure autonomy: Restore fixed tenure and pay parity with Election Commissioners.
Revisit privacy limits: Amend Section 44(3) of DPDPA 2023 to balance privacy with citizens’ right to know.
Digitize RTI: Nationwide online portals, dashboards, and virtual hearings to reduce pendency.
Public vigilance: Civil society, media, and judiciary must actively protect the transparency ecosystem.

Conclusion

After two decades, the RTI remains India’s strongest democratic reform—but its spirit is weakening. Reviving it requires not new laws but renewed political will, institutional integrity, and citizen participation.
Transparency must remain central to governance—because democracy thrives when citizens can ask questions and get honest answers.