Activists decried new rules under the Right to Information Act that has reduced the tenure of Information Commissioners from five years to three, saying the changes would affect their independence. The government had notified the rules recently.

The changes notified

1. The Right to Information (Term of Office, Salaries, Allowances and Other Terms and Conditions of Service of Chief Information Commissioner, Information Commissioners in the Central Information Commission, State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners in the State Information Commission) Rules, 2019 notified by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions set the tenure of Information Commissioners at three years.
2. It gave the government the discretion to decide on “conditions of service” for which no express provisions are made in the rules.
3. The Chief Information Commissioner’s salary has been fixed at ?2.5 lakh and an Information Commissioner’s at ?2.25 lakh.

Why activists criticizing new rules

• Reacting to the notification, activists are of the view that the government had amended the RTI Act in July and had not issued the prescribed rules for nearly three months after the amendment received the President’s assent on August 1. 
• The rules had been drafted and promulgated in a “completely surreptitious manner in flagrant violation” of the procedures laid down in the Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy of 2014.
• The policy requires all draft rules to be placed in the public domain for comments/suggestions of people. The draft was not available in the public domain and no consultations were held with members of the public.
• Among the new rules, the government has been given the “power to relax” their provisions, which raised “serious concerns that the government could potentially invoke these powers to determine different tenures for different Commissioners at the time of appointment”.

Issues

1. Threatening independence: The Opposition has argued that the government’s discretion in deciding tenure and service conditions will take away the independence of the RTI authorities.
2. Can endanger democracy: Independent structures set up to regulate and monitor the government are vital to a democratic state committed to delivering justice and constitutional guarantees.
3. It can result in misuse of power: Critics also argue that the government wants to curb the RTI because RTI is a constant challenge to the misuse of power. 
4. Bypassing pre-legislative consultation: Critics also question the manner in which the amendments are being pushed through without any citizen consultation, bypassing examination by the standing committee demonstrates the desperation to pass the amendments without even proper parliamentary scrutiny.

Conclusion

The RTI Act is regarded as one of the most successful laws of independent India. It has given ordinary citizens the confidence and the right to ask questions of government authorities. The law is seen as having acted as a deterrent for government servants against taking arbitrary decisions. Any change in the legislation should not dilute its prime objective.