corporate law

Proposed Amendments to the Right to Information Act: Key Concerns and Implications

Proposed Amendments to the Right to Information Act

The Union government is contemplating a series of amendments to the Right to Information (RTI) Act, intended to tackle what it characterizes as ‘mischievous and frivolous’ inquiries. The RTI Act is vital for promoting transparency in government operations. These proposed amendments may also allow public scrutiny of certain aspects of the security establishment. While the Indian Army and other armed forces may remain exempt, some information related to paramilitary forces could become disclosable under the new provisions.

Concerns Raised by RTI Activists

RTI activists are likely to resist these proposed changes. Prominent figures such as Aruna Roy, Nikhil De, Shekhar Singh, and Arundhati Roy have jointly urged Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to reject amendments that would limit ‘frivolous’ applications or eliminate access to "file noting."

In their letter, they highlighted the difficulties in clearly defining vexatious and frivolous applications. They argue that such definitions are often subjective and could be misused by officials. The activists express concern that legislation aimed at increasing “transparency” and enhancing “accountability” in governance, while excluding critical decision-making elements, diminishes the essence of the RTI Act.

Arvind Kejriwal, a key member of Parivartan, has articulated that excluding frivolous requests from the RTI purview could considerably reduce the Act's overall effectiveness.

Misuse of the RTI Act

Government officials have cited several instances of RTI misuse to support the proposed amendments. A recent case in Maharashtra serves as an illustration: a member of a below-poverty-line (BPL) family requested historical records from as far back as the 1950s. After receiving thousands of pages at no cost, the individual reportedly sold these documents as scrap paper.

Conclusion

The potential amendments to the RTI Act have ignited substantial debate among government officials and activists. As discussions continue, it will be essential to find a balance between ensuring transparency and addressing concerns about misuse for the ongoing viability of this critical legislation.