Introduction :-

RTI is one of the landmark acts which has led to a significant boost in accountability of the govt towards the people.The Right to Information (RTI) Act, operationalised in October 2005, was seen as a powerful tool for citizen empowerment. It showed an early promise by exposing wrongdoings at high places, such as in the organisation of the Commonwealth Games, and the allocation of 2G spectrum and coal blocks.The RTI Assessment and Analysis Group (RAAG) report found: 4-5 million applications are filed under the Act every year.

RTI Act, 2005 :- 

What makes Right To Information Act 2005 special is its power and practicality to seek and get information from government authorities. The law also promoted transparency and accountability in public authorities.

Article 19(1) of the Indian Constitution specifies that the Right to Information (RTI) is a part of the fundamental rights. It says that every citizen has the freedom of speech and expression. In 1976, in the Raj Narain vs the State of UP, it was held by the Supreme Court that people cannot speak unless they know. Hence the Right to Information is embedded in Article 19. It was also said in the same case that the in the Indian democracy, people are the masters which give them the right to know about the functioning of the government. RTI Act provides machinery for exercising this fundamental right.

As per the RTI Act 2005, every citizen has the right to receive a timely response from the government for any information that is sought by them with respect to the functioning of the government

Features of the act as follows :- 

• The Act covers the whole of India except Jammu and Kashmir, where J&K Right to Information Act is in force. It covers all the constitutional authorities, including executive, legislature and judiciary; any institution or body established or constituted by an act of Parliament or a state legislature.
• It is also defined in the Act that bodies or authorities established or constituted by order or notification of appropriate government including bodies "owned, controlled or substantially financed" by government, or non-Government organizations "substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds".
• Private bodies are not within the Act's ambit directly. In a decision of Sarbjit roy vs Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission,the Central Information Commission also reaffirmed that privatised public utility companies fall within the purview of RTI. As of 2014, private institutions and NGOs receiving over 95% of their infrastructure funds from the government come under the Act.
• The Central Information Commission (CIC) held that the political parties are public authorities and are answerable to citizens under the RTI Act. .In August 2013 the government introduced a Right To Information (Amendment) Bill which would remove political parties from the scope of the law. Currently no parties are under the RTI Act and there has a case been filed for bringing all political parties under it.
• Every Public authority is obligated to maintain a computerised version of all the records in a manner that could be accessed over a network at any place within the country by issuing it to the person on his/her demand.Various channels need to be frequently updated by the public authority so that the use of RTI Act to seek information can be kept to a bare minimum.
• Time period for Public Information Officer : Expeditiously or within 30 days from the date of receipt by public authority.
• Maximum time gap for 1st appeal : 30 days since limit of supply of information is expired.
• Time period for Appellate Authority : Within 30 days or in exceptional cases 45 days from the date of receipt by public authority.
• Maximum time gap for 2nd appeal : 90 days since limit of supply of information is expired.
• RTI act also asks for computerization and proactively publish information.

Proposed Amendments to RTI Act:-

The govt has recently proposed some changes in the act which are said to be regressive in nature. There are set of targeted and fashioned amendments to the RTI Act which will not only undermine one part of the Act but structurally weaken the independence and authority of the only body that gives it teeth, thereby nullifying the entire Act.

• The government proposes to do away with the equivalence of the Central Information Commissioners with the Election Commissioners on the ground that the two have different mandates.
• The underlying assumption that transparency is less important for a democracy than holding of free and fair elections is absurd.
• The government also proposes to replace the existing fixed five-year tenure of the Information Commissioners with tenure as may be prescribed by it. This would make the tenure largesse to be bestowed by the government.This would be detrimental to the independence and authority of the Information Commissions.

Challenges to the RTI Act :- 

• Huge level of pendency of cases both at national as well as state levels.
• Non-imposition of penalties – data supplied by 20 commissions shows that penalty was imposed in just 2.4% of the cases disposed of.
• More than 40 RTI activists had been killed in the process of exposing wrongdoing.
• Laxity by public authorities in publishing information.
• The RTI Act, did not give adequate authority to the Information Commissions to enforce their decisions.

Analysis of performance of the act :-

Right to Information Act was hailed as an important event in the democracy of India. It provided people with power to gain information and to use that information to assert their other rights and provide a check on the working governmental authorities by bringing transparency and accountability.But the implementation of RIT act did not happen as was imagined: -

• There are many areas which are out of limits of RIT act (Even, application of RTI to judiciary and legislature is limited).
• The exclusion of law enforcement agencies is major cause of discontent of RIT supporters.
• Disregard of announcements of Chief Information Commission by political parties indicate the lack of power to enforce the rulings of CIC.
• The recent controversy of non-appointment of CIC for a long-time shows the apathy of government towards the act.
• Official Secrets Act, framed by colonial power still restricts much information out of the purview whether they did not have any relevance to security and integrity of India. For example Correspondence related to Subhash Chandra Bose.
• All the government organisations were asked to put in public general information but this was not followed by many institutions and there is no deadline to this provision.
• Appointment of IC is partisan
• Information is presented in a technical language by government departments
• Maintenance of information is not automated and efficient
• Awareness of act is low among masses
• Costs is sometimes high

Bureaucratic pre-eminence in information commissions results in promotion of traditional bureaucratic ethos of secrecy and lack of accountability.
Performance wise other than the implementation failure RTI is effectively been used by activists even at the cost of their life. Various Public Interest Litigations are filed in courts to change the course of executive. The base of recent check on public advertisement was based on the findings of RTI.

RIT is a strong tool to use the democratic space provided in India. Some problems still remain in implementation and provisions but overall RTI is effectively use by many activists and can provide a check on excessive and unnecessary power of executive and other governmental bodies.

Conclusion :- 

For over a decade, citizens of India have tenaciously protected and guarded this people’s legislation, preventing repeated attempts to dilute the Act through amendments.Thirteen years of the Act’s functioning have given us enough experience to hold a public debate on making it more effective. However, if the issues listed above are not addressed, this sunshine law will lose its promise, particularly in terms of ensuring transparency at higher levels of governance.

Nonetheless, pre-legislative consultation prior to the amendment is a more effective and democratic way to bring any changes to the Act. RTI is a mechanism to develop and ensure transparency and accountability, in line with Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. All efforts must be directed to strengthen it.