Re-examination of the Right to Information (RTI) Act: Economic Survey 2025-26

Copyright infringement not intended

Picture Courtesy:  INDIAN EXPRESS

Context

The Economic Survey 2025-26 recommended re-evaluation of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.  

What is Right to Information (RTI) Act 2005?

The act defines rules for citizens' right to information, replacing the Freedom of Information Act, 2002.

Objectives: To promote transparency and accountability in public authorities by replacing the culture of secrecy (associated with the Official Secrets Act, 1923).

Key Features & Provisions

Fundamental Right: RTI is recognized as a fundamental right flowing from Article 19(1)(a) (Freedom of Speech and Expression) and Article 21 (Right to Life) of the Constitution.

Applicability: It covers all "Public Authorities," which includes bodies established under the Constitution, Parliament, or State Legislatures, and NGOs that are substantially financed by the government.

Time-Bound Response: Public Information Officers (PIOs) must provide information within 30 days. If the request concerns a person’s life or liberty, the response must be provided within 48 hours.

Proactive Disclosure (Section 4): Agencies are required to proactively publish records—such as budgets, functions, and duties—to minimize the need for formal requests.

Appeal Mechanism: A two-tier mechanism exists for appeals. The first appeal is made to a senior officer in the same department, and the second appeal is made to the Central or State Information Commission.

Penalties: Officials who fail to provide information without a valid reason can be fined ₹250 per day, up to a maximum of ₹25,000. 

Exemptions (Section 8): Certain sensitive information can be withheld, including that which affects national security, sovereignty, strategic interests, or relations with foreign states. 

• The Digital Personal Data Protection Act amended Section 8(1)(j) to more broadly exempt "personal information" from disclosure.
• However, a "public interest override" (Section 8(2)) allows for disclosure if the public interest outweighs the harm to protected interests. 

RTI (Amendment) Act , 2019: Empowered the Union Government to fix the tenures, salaries, and service conditions of Information Commissioners, which critics argue affects their autonomy.

Key Proposals of the Economic Survey 2025-26

The Survey recommended re-examination of the RTI Act, 2005, to balance transparency with effective governance. 

It argues the Act, though vital for accountability, should not be used for "idle curiosity" or external micromanagement of government work.

Adjustments to the existing RTI framework

Exempting the Deliberative Process: To shield brainstorming notes, working papers, and draft comments from public disclosure until a final decision is made.

Introducing a Ministerial Veto: To create a "narrowly defined" power for ministers to block the release of certain information, subject to parliamentary oversight.

Protecting Internal Records: To prevent the disclosure of service records, transfer details, and confidential reports of government staff.

Adopting International Practices: The Survey points to laws in the US, UK, and Sweden, which it claims offer greater protection for internal government deliberations and personnel rules.

Arguments Against Amending the RTI Act

Civil society organisations and former information commissioners have strongly opposed the Survey's proposals, arguing they could dismantle India's transparency regime.

Lack of Evidence: Critics argue that there is no concrete evidence to support the claim that officials are being constrained. Any amendment must be based on data, not anecdotal fears.

Existing Safeguards are Sufficient: Section 8 of the RTI Act already provides comprehensive exemptions for sensitive information, including national security and cabinet papers. 

Neglect of Proactive Disclosure: Poor implementation of Section 4 of the Act, which mandates proactive disclosure of information by public authorities. 

Recent Dilution of the Act: Critics note that the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, has already weakened the RTI Act by creating broad exemptions for personal information.

Existing Challenges in the RTI Framework

Legislative Dilution: The DPDP Act, 2023, amends Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act to exempt all "personal information," removing the critical public interest override.

High Pendency and Delays: The appeal mechanism is severely overburdened. As of June 30, 2025, over 4.13 lakh appeals and complaints were pending across 29 Information Commissions, delaying justice (Source: Satark Nagrik Sangathan report).

Poor Proactive Disclosure: The failure of government departments to voluntarily publish information as mandated by Section 4 of the Act forces citizens to file RTIs for basic data.

Way Forward

Weakening the RTI Act for administrative ease would be a setback; a stable economy depends on a transparent, accountable bureaucracy, so the focus should be on strengthening the RTI ecosystem.

Enforce Proactive Disclosure: The government must strictly enforce the implementation of Section 4 to reduce the burden on both citizens and commissions.

Strengthen Information Commissions: Vacancies must be filled promptly, and commissions should be provided with adequate resources to clear the huge backlog of cases.

Conduct an Evidence-Based Review: Any proposed amendment should be based on a comprehensive, transparent, and participatory review with concrete evidence, not on unsubstantiated fears.

Protect the Public Interest Test: The principle that disclosure is the norm and secrecy is the exception is the soul of the RTI Act. This "public interest test" must be protected at all costs.

Conclusion

The RTI Act is not a hurdle to governance; it is the master key to good governance, ensuring that democracy serves the people it is meant for.

Source: INDIANEXPRESS