The Right to Information (RTI) Act, operationalised in October 2005, was seen as a powerful tool for citizen empowerment. Democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information which are vital to its functioning and also to contain corruption and to hold governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed.  It showed an early promise by exposing wrongdoings at high places and bringing to limelight various scams. The act now faces multiple challenges.

Body:

RTI and its effectiveness:

• Fight corruption: Its ability to fight corruption has significantly increased its hold in India.
• Ensure Transparency: The enactment of this act ensured transparency in the bureaucratic systems.
• Fight for Rights: It has increased its position as a major in charge for the fight of rights of the people. It aims to bring an end to the culture of governmental secrecy
• The right to information laws, alongside expanding the citizen’s rights, should be systematically employed to transform governance.
• These laws could be a powerful magnet for mobilizing the people and enthusing them to use these laws to enhance and expand their choices for their own betterment.
• RTI laws directly contribute to improvement in governance by breaking down the barriers between the government and the people by enhancing trust.
• RTI is the most powerful assault on developing countries endemic corruption.

RTI and political parties:

• If political parties are kept out, it sets a precedent whereby other institutions can argue that they too be kept out of its purview because there are too many frivolous claims, too much paperwork, too many NGOs with suspect motivations and so on and so forth.
• Political parties in our country occupy a very central space in democracy. People don’t vote so much for individuals as they do for parties.
• Parties come out with great statements before elections. People vote on the basis of which party says what. Parties finally form the government. And the government’s policies are decided based on the ideologies of the political parties.
• In India, it is widely accepted notion that fountain head of the corruption is political funding.
• It is therefore, necessary to introduce internal democracy, financial transparency and accountability in the working of the political parties.
• To ensure less influence of industrial houses on policy making: Most of the parties have almost 75% of their income from unknown sources. Generally corporate and industrial houses give them funds to change policies, give illegal clearance and to hamper their competitor’s interest. It may also hamper people and national interest.
• Political parties enjoy a “stronghold” over their elected MPs and MLAs under Schedule 10 of the Constitution. The Schedule makes it compulsory for MPs and MLAs to abide by the directions of their parent parties.
• It would be within the average voter’s fundamental right to information to know the financial details of political parties.
• Under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 all political parties must affirm their allegiance to the Constitution of India and such allegiance is made compulsory for the purpose of registration under sub-section (7) of Section 29A. Therefore, political parties so registered must furnish information to the public under the right of information under Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India, since right of information has been held to be a part of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a).
• The Law Commission of India in its 170th Report on ‘Reform of the Electoral Laws’ in May 1999 had recommended transparency in the functioning of political parties.

However, the move has attracted sharp protests from all major parties on account of one argument – that the political parties are not public authorities.

• Political parties were not established by the constitution or an act of parliament and therefore should not be under the RTI.
• Political parties are not public authorities as they are not set up under the Constitution or any law enacted by Parliament – they can’t be treated as an institution or establishment.
• If political parties come under the RTI it will affect their smooth internal functioning.
• Political rivals will start using RTI tool with malicious intent.

RTI and judiciary:

• The Supreme Court has time and again lauded the role of the Right to Information (RTI) Act as an “integral part of any vibrant democracy.”
• But the apex court itself has refused to come under the ambit of the information transparency law for the past one decade.
• RTI will compromise independence of judiciary as specified by constitution.
• Being under RTI act, SC has to compromise secrecy & security involved in certain cases. This may prove detrimental.
• Judiciary would become puppet in the hands of people rather than being the sole justice provider of the country.
• It will increase the political involvement in judiciary.

However,

• Accountability and transparency of judiciary is now in question.
• It will give less power to people to get their answers easily without any delay & informal paperwork.
• With RTI option available to public, Corruption will be checked with increasing lucidity.
• Courts have always been questioned for pending cases. RTI can place yardstick among judiciary for timely disposal of justice. So resistance to be under RTI a barrier to decrease pending cases.
• It will decrease the faith of people if they could also know about judicial working.

Conclusion:

RTI Act has transparency, accountability and participation as its mandate and is considered equally important legal document after the Constitution. There is a necessity to undertake the measures to strengthen this powerful tool that can deliver significant social benefits.  It  can  provide  a strong  support  to  democracy  and  promote  good  governance  by  empowering  citizen’s ability  to  participate  effectively  and  hold  government  officials  accountable  rather  than just an information provider.