Modifying the RTI Act via the Data Protection Bill is unnecessary.
- By allowing the central government to control the tenure and service conditions of the Chief Information Commissioner and other Information Commissioners, the amendments have created a potential avenue for executive overreach. This risks undermining the independence of the Information Commissions, which were envisioned to function as autonomous watchdogs.
- Critics argue that these changes dilute the foundational principles of the RTI Act and weaken the institutional architecture that has, for nearly two decades, facilitated the democratic right of citizens to question and scrutinize authority. While the government claims administrative efficiency and uniformity as the rationale, these benefits must be weighed against the broader consequences of weakening a hard-won citizen-centric law.
- In a democracy, transparency is not just a virtue—it is a necessity. Any move that threatens to compromise the openness of public institutions must be carefully scrutinized, especially when it affects tools like the RTI Act that empower the common citizen.
- For India to continue on the path of deepening democracy, it is essential to strengthen, not dilute, laws that promote transparency and accountability. The RTI Act should be preserved in its original spirit, with reforms focused on enhancing its reach and effectiveness, not curtailing its autonomy. The future of democratic governance in India depends significantly on how seriously we protect and nurture the right to information.
- In essence, the need of the hour is not to alter or dilute the RTI Act, but to reinforce its institutions, build awareness among citizens, ensure speedy disposal of applications and appeals, and uphold the autonomy of the Information Commissions. Only then can we truly claim to be a government accountable to the people.