The RTI Amendment Bill is another nail in the RTI coffin

The current prime minister came to power on the back of an evocative slogan: “Na Khaunga, Na Khane Dunga [I will not engage in corruption, nor will I allow others to do so]”. His government aimed to stand for accountability and transparency. One only needs to look at its disinclination to operationalise the Lokpal, the Whistleblowers Act, and the Grievance Redressal Law to understand that these slogans and promises were empty words with little conviction. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government’s attitude towards the Right To Information Act only bolsters this perception.

The RTI law passed in 2005—a watershed moment in the Indian context—was meant to usher in an era of greater transparency. The intent of the Act was to empower citizens with the truth and make the government more accountable to the governed. Indeed the RTI has brought the public’s focus on high-level corruption—over the past 10 years, it has brought to light several aspects of the Adarsh scam and the 2G scam, to name a few. At the same time, that we know so little about the demonetisation exercise is testament to the limits of the RTI Act. As activist Venkatesh Nayak has told The Hindu, we are regrettably steering towards “an era of disclosure on a need-to-know basis, not a right-to-know basis”. This is precisely what the RTI was supposed to change.

The RTI Amendment Bill, 2018, is another nail in the RTI coffin. It seeks to weaken the independence of Information Commissioners. The Opposition got wind of this proposed amendment only after the legislative agenda of the monsoon session of Parliament was published, which listed the amendment Bill as an item in a single line. Needless to say, the clandestine manner in which the government wants to amend the RTI is in gross violation of the constitutional conventions that mandate “pre-legislative consultations”. 

It is ironic that the proposed amendment—to a law aimed at bringing transparency—lacks transparency itself. The Bill is being opposed by several Opposition parties and RTI activists, who warn that the amendments will dilute the RTI law and compromise the independence of Information Commissioners.

But this isn’t the first time the government is attempting to do so. In 2017, it proposed amendments to the RTI law that would have made the RTI law anything but user-friendly. The then proposed amendments were in defiance of the Supreme Court’s orders, and made the process of filing an appeal more cumbersome and increased the scope of rejection on technical grounds. Perhaps the most contentious provisions of the rules was the proposal to allow for the withdrawal of appeals based on a written communication by the appellant, and automatic closure of proceedings upon death of the appellant.

More importantly, given the Indian scenario—where RTI applicants continue to be threatened, occasionally assaulted and even killed—such provisions would have provided vested interests the option to silence the information seeker through coercion or physical harm. These concerns are substantiated by the “Hall of Shame” curated by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, which documented attacks on RTI activists—since 2007, 65 RTI activists have allegedly been killed, 157 attacked and 168 threatened.

In the face of Opposition and sharp criticism from civil society and the Central Information Commission, the government shelved the proposed rules in June 2018, offering a brief respite.

Who’s afraid of RTI?

The government of today is not alone. “Everybody in power hates the RTI,” said Shailesh Gandhi, a former Central Information Commissioner, in 2017 to The Hindu. Other parties, too, have tried to dilute the law though not as blatantly and disrespectfully such as the BJP is trying to do. Democracy, in its true sense, guarantees an inclusive atmosphere with plurality of thoughts and voices coupled with checks and balances. This idea of democracy is adversative to the Right-wing way of governance. Who benefits from fewer RTI applications and disclosures? The answer is obvious.

A common justification used as a defence against the proposed dilution of the RTI is the misuse of the law and the large number of frivolous, vexatious complaints. Citizens often resort to satirical queries, and the law serves as a gauge of the population’s disposition. A few months after this government came into power, an RTI applicant wanted to know the due date of the promised “achhe din”. It may be argued that these questions are frivolous and make a strong case for diluting the RTI, but scope for misuse of an Act can not be a ground to invalidate it.

The RTI, as we know, is far from perfect but it is often the only weapon available. The arrogance of the BJP in introducing such secret amendments that could nullify all the gains from the RTI stems from its numbers in Parliament and its influence over public discourse. Any efforts at diluting the RTI must be fervently opposed, with civil society and lawmakers uniting against the amendments and rallying together under the banner: “Na Pass Karenge, Na Karne Denge [will not pass the amendments, nor allow others to do so]”.