Right to information
Right to Information (RTI)
1. What is the Right to Information?
The Right to Information is the right of citizens to access information held by public authorities. It is a crucial tool for transparency, accountability, and good governance in a democracy.
It empowers citizens to seek information regarding government functioning, decisions, policies, and expenditure.
It acts as a check on corruption and misuse of power by public officials.
It promotes participatory democracy by making government actions transparent.
2. Constitutional and Legal Basis of RTI
(a) Constitutional Foundation
The Indian Constitution does not explicitly mention RTI as a fundamental right.
However, the Supreme Court has held that the Right to Information is implicit in the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a).
It is also connected to the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 as access to information is necessary for meaningful exercise of rights.
(b) Statutory Framework
The Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) is the key legislation in India.
It mandates timely response to citizen requests for government information.
The Act applies to all public authorities, including executive, legislature, and judiciary.
It creates Information Commissions at Central and State levels to oversee implementation.
3. Why is RTI Important?
Promotes transparency and accountability.
Helps citizens to participate effectively in democratic governance.
Helps to prevent corruption and misuse of power.
Ensures better public administration.
4. Limitations and Exceptions
Information affecting national security, privacy, trade secrets, or fiduciary relationships may be exempt.
Section 8 of the RTI Act lists such exemptions.
However, exemptions are narrowly construed and balanced against the public interest.
Landmark Case Laws on Right to Information
⚖️ Case 1: People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India (1997)
Facts:
Petition challenging the government’s refusal to disclose information about police excesses.
Issue:
Is the right to information a fundamental right under the Constitution?
Held:
The Supreme Court declared that the right to information is part of the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a).
Citizens have a constitutional right to demand disclosure of information by the government to make democracy meaningful.
Significance:
Laid the foundation for RTI as a constitutional right.
Paved the way for the later enactment of the RTI Act, 2005.
⚖️ Case 2: Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting v. Cricket Association of Bengal (1995)
Facts:
Questioned whether sports bodies come under the purview of the RTI Act.
Issue:
Is information held by bodies substantially financed by the government accessible?
Held:
The Court held that bodies “substantially financed” by the government must provide information.
RTI applies not only to government departments but also to government-funded bodies.
Significance:
Broadened the scope of the right to information to include quasi-governmental bodies.
⚖️ Case 3: S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1982)
Facts:
Concerned the transparency in appointments of judges and public servants.
Issue:
Whether citizens have a right to know about government appointments.
Held:
The Court emphasized transparency and public participation in government processes.
The right to information is necessary to expose corruption or nepotism in appointments.
Significance:
Reinforced the principle that public offices must be subject to public scrutiny.
⚖️ Case 4: Central Board of Secondary Education v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (CBSE Case) (2011)
Facts:
Whether examination results and evaluation criteria can be disclosed under RTI.
Issue:
Is information relating to third parties protected from disclosure?
Held:
The Court held that personal information which does not relate to public activity or interest can be denied.
But information that affects public interest or fairness in government exams must be disclosed.
Significance:
Clarified the balance between right to information and right to privacy.
⚖️ Case 5: Raj Narain v. State of UP (1975)
Facts:
During the Emergency, government actions were shielded from scrutiny.
Issue:
Whether citizens can demand information about government actions under Article 19.
Held:
The Court held that any law or action restricting information that impacts fundamental rights must meet strict scrutiny.
Reinforced that transparency is vital even during emergencies.
Significance:
Highlighted the need for openness in governance, even under exceptional circumstances.
⚖️ Case 6: Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Mohd. Zuber (1997)
Facts:
Applicant sought information on a government investigation.
Issue:
Can information regarding ongoing investigations be denied?
Held:
Court held that disclosure of information which prejudices ongoing investigations can be denied to protect public interest.
Significance:
Showed the balance between RTI and national/public security interests.
⚖️ Case 7: Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education v. Paritosh Bhupendra Bafna (2013)
Facts:
Applicant requested evaluation criteria under RTI.
Issue:
Should evaluation criteria be disclosed?
Held:
Court ruled that such information is not personal but related to public interest and must be disclosed.
Significance:
Affirmed that transparency in educational processes is part of RTI.
Summary Table of Important Cases
| Case Name | Year | Key Principle |
|---|---|---|
| PUCL v. Union of India | 1997 | RTI is implicit in Article 19(1)(a) |
| Ministry of Info & Broadcasting v. CAB | 1995 | Bodies substantially financed by govt are covered |
| S.P. Gupta v. Union of India | 1982 | Transparency in appointments |
| CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay | 2011 | Balancing privacy and public interest |
| Raj Narain v. State of UP | 1975 | Transparency during emergency |
| Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Zuber | 1997 | Denial allowed for ongoing investigations |
| Maharashtra Board v. Paritosh Bafna | 2013 | Disclosure of evaluation criteria under RTI |
Conclusion
The Right to Information is a cornerstone of democratic governance, enabling transparency, preventing corruption, and empowering citizens. Judicial interpretations have consistently expanded its scope while balancing it with competing interests like privacy and national security.
RELATED Blog
0 comments