Events & Issues

New Delhi, 31 October 2011

Right to Information

INDISPENSABLE TOOL IN DEMOCRACY

Dr. S.Saraswathi

(Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)

The question of re-examining the Right to Information (RTI) Act has recently been in the news, with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh sounding caution in the exercise of the right. Addressing a conference of Central Information Commission last month, he had stated: "We must also take a critical look at the exemption clauses in the Right to Information Act to determine whether they serve the larger good and whether a change is needed in them." His point is that this right should not adversely affect the deliberative processes in the Government while verbally assuring that dilution of the rights provided in the Act is not the aim.

In the background of exposure of one scam after scam another involving public functionaries at various levels not excluding the high-ranking, any suggestion to amend the RTI Act cannot but raise suspicions regarding the intentions of the Government. Though the RTI is not the sole medium of recent exposures of corrupt practices in public offices, it has been an important tool in the hands of activists.

Even if a re-look is due in the normal course of reviewing implementation processes and identifying practical problems, the timing clearly makes it suspect, notwithstanding, Law Minister Salman Khurshid’s assurance that there was no such proposal. To a neutral observer, it looks as though the authorities are more worried about disclosures of lapses and wrong doings than about the unlawful or inappropriate commissions and omissions on the part of those vested with various responsibilities and required power and authority which are detrimental to public interests.

Further, there are reports of RTI activists being attacked in several places.  At least 12 activists were killed between January 2010 and August 2011, according to a report of the Asian Centre for Human Rights. Even a policeman was killed for seeking information about Government funds and progress of work in a village in Uttar Pradesh. The RTI activists are said to be the most vulnerable human rights’ defenders. This shows the survival of the colonial culture to zealously guard secrecy as a necessary quality of effective management and governance - a position untenable in participatory democracy.

The fear that the RTI could come in the way of good governance, threaten the honest and affect the deliberative process is misconstrued. RTI does not open unrestricted access to information and the legislation itself contains sufficient safeguards that restrict publicity of information.

The object of the RTI Act is to “make governance transparent” and provide citizens the “right to know the process of governance” which are essential for a true and effective democracy.  The object of the Act is “to secure access to information under the control of public authorities in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority”, and to constitute a Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions.

The Act itself refers to the necessity to harmonise conflicting interests between transparency and accountability on the one hand, and confidentiality of sensitive information on the other. As the Act itself provides the limitations in disclosing information, the need for “caution” sounds redundant, and offers scope for dilution of the law in the name of caution.

Under Section 8 of the Act, information which would affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, security, strategic and economic interests of the State or its relations with foreign countries, information likely to incite violence or endanger life and physical safety, information received in confidence or containing trade secrets or intellectual property rights need not be divulged. The list of prohibited items is large and covers all areas where information cannot be shared with the public in public interest.

 “A popular Government without popular information or the means of acquiring it is but a prologue to a Farce or Tragedy, or perhaps both.  Knowledge will for ever govern ignorance.  And a people who mean to be their own Governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives”, said Justice Madison after the adoption of the first amendment of the Constitution of the US which recognizes the “right to know” as a constitutional right.  It laid the foundation for transparency and accountability of the Government to the people. The Freedom of Information Act was adopted in the US way back in 1966.

The RTI Act in India has proved within a few years to be an effective instrument of empowerment of the citizens. Its potential is more than that of the Lokpal in the making. It is a positive measure and has the power to promote in the elected and appointed “public servants” a strong sense of accountability in their functioning, and encourage citizens to shed their apathy leaving things to their fate and cultivate a strong civic sense.

The RTI has produced remarkable results even in educationally backward places, and has proved a boon to common people cheated for long in payment of wages, and in their entitlements in the public distribution system and welfare schemes of the Government. People have started asking questions and seeking information on how public functionaries are working, how public funds are spent, how rules are followed, how discretionary powers are used, and so on.

The RTI has doubtless shaken the public administration system to behave and fulfil its role. The colonial legacy of fear of Government officials, a sense of helplessness in dealing with them, and the feeling of a huge gap between public functionaries and the public is declining. The full potential of this legislation, however, is yet to come.

Any dilution of the Act will rob the citizens of what little they have gained in making administration “public”, that is, transparent and accountable to the people. There is nothing in the Act to intimidate honest officials or obstruct free discussions and expression of opinions.

There is a general misconception that presentation of different viewpoints, say within political parties, or by officials and ministers denote rifts.  Such differences are often highlighted by the media also as rifts. Far from that, these are healthy signs of open consideration of issues before taking decisions.

It is the age of information, and information has many outlets to break open suppression efforts. In a responsible Government like ours, there can be but few secrets and people have a right to know everything about every single public dealing. There can be no compromise. ---INFA                                                      

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)