KEY ISSUES AND CONSTRAINTS IN IMPLEMENTATION OF RTI ACT, 2005

THIS ARTICLE WAS WRITE HITESHI AGARWAL, A STUDENT OF SS JAIN SUBODH LAW COLLEGE

INTRODUCTION

Right to Information Act, 2005 is aimed at transcending one step closer in proximity to the open society, where the State is highly transparent in nature and consequently progresses towards strengthening the democracy. When citizens gain the knowledge of how the Government is functioning, it enables them to take a better judgment on its real time implementation. Right to Information Act, which is derived from Right to Life of the Constitution of India, enables the Right to question. Art. 19(1) of the Indian Constitution specifies Right to Information is a part of Fundamental Rights of citizens. It says that every citizen has freedom of speech and expression. In Raj Narain v. State of U.P.[1] it was held by the Supreme Court that people cannot speak unless they know.  Hence, the Right to Information is embedded in Art. 19.  It was also said in the same case that in Indian democracy, people are the masters, which gives them the right to know about the functioning of the government. RTI provides machinery for exercising this right.

Ironically, the Act whilst aimed at improving implementation of key Government policies suffers in the key implementation phase. There was lot of excitement amongst members of public when the act was introduced in 2005. The perception that this Act alone might be the solution to the corruption and lethargy of Indian Bureaucracy is slowly replaced by the cynicism. This view gains further ground, when the incidents of not receiving information, and incidents of abuse faced by the Information seekers outnumber the success stories of the Act. The Article highlights the discrepancies and challenges faced in fair implementation of  the RTI Act, due to issues such as pendency of cases at the National and State levels, non-imposition of penalties, laxity by public authorities in publishing information, lack of  adequate number of Public Information Officers and low awareness among masses of the act.

ISSUES FACED ON THE DEMAND SIDE:

• Low Public Awareness: The Act lays down that the appropriate government may organize educational programmes to advance the understanding of the public, especially the disadvantaged communities regarding how to exercise their rights contemplated under the Act.[2] On the other hand, the Nodal Dept. has not undertaken any substantial steps to promote the RTI Act. Though some SICs ( Orissa and Andhra Pradesh) have been promoting the usage of the Act at district levels.
• Constraints faced in filing applications: The RTI Act specifies to the competent authorities and appropriate governments to make rules for the implementation of the Act.[3] 6(1) of the Act provides reasonable assistance must be provided to the applicant while filing an application but there are several constraints in implementation of the following guideline:

1. There has been non-availability of user guides. Lack of user guide results in undue hardship to information seekers to gather knowledge about the process for submitting a RTI request.
2. The Act provides that an RTI application can be submitted in writing or through electronic means.[4] However, inadequate efforts have been made to receive RTI applications through electronic means.

• Inconvenient payment channels: While it is desirable for the State Government to collect fee from any mode but the majority PIOs require the applicant to deposit the fee via cash or DD which causes inconvenience to the applicants.
• Poor Quality of Information: Due to lack of infrastructure and adequate processes to comply with the RTI Act, the quality of information provided is very low. The information provided is either incomplete or lacks the substantial data. The quality of response provided can be a direct consequence of the transparency in its processes or record management practices.
• Constraints faced in inspection of records: Under the Act, the information is to be provided in the form requested unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority.[5] There is inadequate awareness of this provision of the RTI Act. This inadequateness can be linked to inadequate training of the PIOs and APIOs to utilize this provision effectively.

ISSUES FACED ON THE SUPPLY SIDE:

• Inevitable delay in flow of information: The Information Commission gets to know about the failure of the Public Authority in providing information within 30-45 days once the complaint is filed due to inadequate measures and processes for an Information Commission to view adherence level to important provisions of the Act.
• Lack of Behavioral Training: RTI is an evolving act, resulting in new dimensions being added routinely. Hence, RTI refresher training or a central knowledge repository needs to be available to the PIOs. Also, the training provided to the PIOs must not be restricted to the RTI Act. There is a need for an external agency to impart training to the PIOs and APIOs of various states and districts.
• Obsolete Record Management Guidelines: Ineffective record management practices and collection of information from field offices leads to delay in processing of RTI applications. The records are required to be catalogued and indexed in a manner that the entire data is available through a centralized system on all over the country.[6] Recordkeeping is a problem in Central and State government ministries due to lack of infrastructural facilities (internet connectivity, photocopies, soft copies). Even if records are stored retrieval of intelligible information cannot be made. It is perhaps because of this situation that there is a tendency to give huge amount of unprocessed bulk information rather than relevant and pertinent information.
• Lack of monitoring and review mechanism: There is no centralized database of RTI applicants. A centralized database of applicants with their information requests and responses from information providers will enable the PIOs to send an accurate and timely compilation under Sec. 25(1).
• Issues faced at the Information Commissions: Under the Act, the Information Commissions at the Central/State level are required to take steps to secure the compliance with the provisions of the Act. However, there have been inadequate processes and records available with the Information Commissions to monitor and review the working of the various Public Authorities and initiate steps to make them comply with the spirit of the Act.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

• The RTI applications must be disposed off within the statutory time limit provided under the Act with complete and comprehensive information. Unless and until the pendency is kept at the manageable level the objective of the Act would not be met.
• The Public Information Commissioners must be given adequate training to be cooperative enough towards the Information seekers. External agency must be appointed to train the officers within and beyond the Act.
• Maintaineance of information must be automated and efficient. The State Government has to play a facilitative role by issuing rules/procedures to mandate the compliance of the Act.
• The role of Information Commissions must not be limited to hearing of appeals but they must also be a watchdog over the public authorities.

[1] 1975 AIR 865,

[2] Right to Information Act, 2005 § 26

[3] Right to Information Act, 2005 § 27(1) & 28(1)

[4] Right to Information Act, 2005 § 6(1)

[5] Right to Information Act, 2005 § 7(9)

[6] Right to Information Act, 2005 § 4(1)(a)