The Right to Information (RTI) Act – one of the most used transparency legislation of modern times – is on the verge of becoming yet another toothless legislation. Both UPA and NDA governments have been guilty of trying to weaken the existing RTI Act.
One after another, there have been many attempts to tweak the Act and to reduce the transparency and accountability of the government to the civil societies and to citizens. After a vociferous protest against the draft of RTI rules, 2017, the Modi government released a revised draft, sharing it on the website of the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT).
This piece will try to analyse the new proposed changes, its impact, criticism and suggestions associated with it.
Proposed Rules:
1. Erratic RTI Fees:
Under the provision of section 27 of the RTI Act, it intends to increase the RTI filing fees from ₹10 to ₹50 through notification from time to time as notified by the Central government.
Objection by civil societies:
This provision will provide the government with a chance to increase the RTI fees as per their whims and fancies. Also, as per provisions of the RTI Act, it is illegal and illegitimate to increase the fees through notification by the Central government.
2. Stipulating Time Frame For A Complaint
Rule 12 (iv) of the RTI rules, 2017 states that a complaint/appeal with the CIC can be filled within a stipulated time duration of 90 days.
If a complainant is aggrieved for (unsatisfactory or no reply), they must file an appeal within a stipulated period of 90 days.
Objections by stakeholders:
Section 18 of RTI Act does not mention any time duration. There is no legal basis to introduce the time limit.
3. Absolute Power to CIC:
A new rule which comes into force after deleting Rule 10 (1) is empowering the CIC alone to decide on the merit of the complaint. The complaint can be dismissed if CIC is satisfied that there are no reasonable grounds to inquire into the matter.
Objections by stakeholders:
This rule will allow CIC to dismiss the complaint without giving the opportunity to the complainant to present or argue his case.
4. Failure In Compliance With The Orders Of The CIC:
As per the revised draft of RTI rules of 2017, the government has further diluted the power of the CIC to penalise the government agencies in case of non-compliance of its orders.
The CIC has to communicate the non-compliance of its order to the government agencies within a time duration of three months, in case they want to penalise it.
Objections by stakeholders:
The CIC can impose penalties, awards and compensation under the RTI Act. Introducing any restriction like time duration will amount to diluting the powers of the CIC.
5. Withdrawal/Abetment of Appeal:
One of the most criticised points in the draft of RTI rules, 2017 is rule 12 which introduces a provision to allow the appellant to withdraw the application and secondly if, during the pendency of the appeal with CIC an RTI activist died, the matter would be closed.
Why has this provision been introduced? It raises suspicion in the minds of civil societies and RTI activists.
But after protests, this rule was deleted by the government keeping in mind the arguments raised by stakeholders.
6. Rule 8 (3) Of Draft RTI rules, 2017
It is being made mandatory for the appellant to serve the copy of the appeal to the respondent, before submitting an appeal to the commission.
Suggestion: It should not be made mandatory for the appellant to serve the copy of the appeal to respondent, keeping in mind the safety and well being of the appellant as well as the sensitive nature of the information being sought.
Since most of the times, the information sought is related to governance, corruption matters and allegations of bribery, it is in the best interests of RTI seekers to not provide a copy of the appeal to the respondent.
Overall, political parties are trying their best to dilute the 2012 rules so that they could make access to information even more tedious. The revised draft will clearly lead to the weakening of the RTI Act.