The Great Erasure: How India's RTI Act Has Morphed into a Right to Deny Information

Once hailed as a revolutionary tool for transparency and accountability, India's Right to Information (RTI) Act is undergoing a profound and troubling transformation. What began as a beacon of citizen empowerment, allowing ordinary people to peer into the workings of government, now increasingly resembles a sophisticated mechanism for public authorities to withhold crucial information.

The very spirit of the Act – a 'presumption of disclosure' – appears to be tragically replaced by a 'presumption of denial', casting a long shadow over democratic governance.

The shift is not merely incidental; it's a systemic erosion. Public Information Officers (PIOs) and even Information Commissions, bodies meant to uphold the Act's principles, are frequently interpreting its exemptions expansively, often against the broader public interest.

Where the law intended to make information accessible, these reinterpretations are creating new barriers, effectively turning a citizen's right to know into an authority's right to conceal. This trend is particularly alarming given the Act's foundational role in promoting open governance and combating corruption.

We see this 'right to deny' playing out in critical areas that directly impact the public.

Consider the electoral bonds scheme, a topic of immense public interest. Despite widespread demand, information on the sources and beneficiaries of these bonds was long obfuscated, only to be revealed through judicial intervention. Similarly, vital data from public sector undertakings, details surrounding high-profile judicial appointments by the collegium, and crucial environmental clearances for large infrastructure projects are frequently deemed exempt.

These are not trivial matters; they are the gears of public life, and their opacity undermines informed public discourse and accountability.

The very arbiters of information access, the Information Commissions, are also facing immense challenges. Often understaffed, under-resourced, and at times perceived as lacking independence, they struggle to manage a deluge of appeals.

The backlog is staggering, and decisions, when they come, can sometimes lean towards upholding denials rather than championing transparency. This creates a bottleneck that effectively stifles the flow of information, leaving citizens frustrated and disempowered.

Further compounding the issue is the glaring failure of public authorities to adhere to the mandate of proactive disclosure.

The RTI Act explicitly requires government departments to suo motu publish information concerning their functions, decision-making processes, budgets, and more. This provision was designed to minimize the need for citizens to file individual RTI applications. Yet, this crucial element is routinely ignored, forcing citizens into a reactive struggle to extract information that should have been freely available.

This non-compliance is not just an oversight; it's a deliberate withholding, adding to the burden on both citizens and the Information Commissions.

The original architects of the RTI Act envisioned a law that would foster a culture of openness, empower citizens, and strengthen the foundations of democracy.

The current trajectory, however, threatens to dismantle this vision, replacing it with a veil of secrecy. If India is to uphold its democratic values and ensure robust public accountability, there must be an urgent and collective effort to reclaim the RTI Act from its current state and restore its original promise: a genuine right to information, not a convenient excuse for denial.