Two Decades of RTI: A Chronicle of Light and Shadows

The article discusses the enabling legacy of RTI, its decline during the past 10 years, and calls on its citizens to take active measures to promote transparency and democratic accountability in India.

The enactment of the Right to Information (RTI) Act in 2005 was a turning point in the democratic process of India and the codification of a right of the citizens to access shared information and the creation of a culture of transparency and accountability. During its first ten years, the RTI regime gave people and civil society the ability to defy opaque governments, unravel the most corrupt deeds, and seek institutional responsiveness. Nevertheless, the course of the RTI Act over the past years has been an alarming trend of systemic watering down. Amendments in the legislation, resistance in the bureaucracy, and weakening of the Information Commissions have played a role in negating the effectiveness of the Act as a basic pillar of participatory democracy.

This article is a critical review of how the RTI Act has developed over the past 20 years, specifically with what has happened to its transparency since 2014. It posits that the continued implementation of RTI by the citizens, the journalists, and the activists is extremely important to maintain the democratic form of accountability. Against the backdrop of growing institutional opaqueness and diminished civic space, the article highlights the necessity to safeguard and revive the RTI structure as one of the most pressing concerns at the moment.

2005-2014: A Decade of Democratic Deepening

The passage of the Right to Information Act in 2005 has brought a revolution in the system of governance in India, whilst empowering citizens to seek transparency and accountability of the government in various areas such as government.

Democratization of Information Access
The RTI Act broke the habit of bureaucratic secrecy, which had been the norm of Indian administration. The Act re-established relations between the state and the people as it personalized the legal right of citizens to the government-held information. It allowed people to submit their inquiries concerning the amount invested in the government, execution of policies, and delivery of services to the citizens, hence promoting participatory governance. RTI applications were being filed in huge numbers, every year from 2005 to 2014, and this indicates the high involvement of the people in the law.

Catalyst for Accountability and Anti-Corruption
RTI turned out to be a powerful weapon of revelation of corruption and inefficiency. Anonymous revelations like anomalies in the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS), ration distribution, and development of infrastructures became feasible through citizen-led RTI interventions. Not only did these revelations spur administrative investigations, but they were added to the social pressure to reform. The preventive nature of the Act on malfeasance was provided in the fact that it was used by whistle-blowers and activists to bring the officials to task.

Empowering Marginalized Communities
RTI was very useful to disadvantaged communities because it is affordable and has easy accessibility. The Act was utilized by rural residents, women, and other Dalit groups to seek changes in local systems of power and entitlements. The civil society groups worked significantly in the training and support of these groups and, in turn, democratized RTI to be utilized by the urban elites. The Act therefore helped in social justice since it allowed the assertion of rights through accessing information.

Increasing Institutional Transparency
The transparency regime was institutionalised through the formation of Information Commissions, both at the central and state levels. These quasi-judicial bodies settled disputes and made sure the standards that RTI provided were adhered to. Their obligatory proactive disclosure rules forced the departments to post the most important data on the internet, which will decrease the number of individual requests. It was also during this time that the judiciary gave RTI the appearance of constitutional compliance by approving the scope of RTI, including its application to political parties and similar establishments in the case of public-private partnerships.

Systematic Undermining Since 2014

Since 2014, there has been a gradual and calculated erosion of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, which has put its entire core principles at stake of transparency, accountability, and participatory governance in India.

Parliamentary and institutional undermining
In a great setback to the RTI model, the Act altering the tenure and status of Information Commissioners was the Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2019. This amendment gave the central government the discretionary authority to decide salary and terms of service, and so, their independence and autonomy to act as quasi-judicial bodies are compromised. According to critics, this change has led to the destruction of the institutional protection that existed before to help prevent executive interference in the RTI mechanism.

Delays, Vacancies, and Apathy
The fact that the RTI regime is experiencing lag can be seen in delays in the appointment of Information Commissions. Some of the State Commissions have worked with skeleton staff, and even the Central Information Commission frequently has no Chief. This has created an enormous queue of appeals and complaints, which has, in essence, deprived them of accessing information in a timely manner. Some states have over a year's average hearing wait time, which watered down the effectiveness of the Act as a time-limited grievance redress mechanism.

Withholding Information
There has been an increasing culture of no information available that has established its stranglehold on the mandatory bodies. More and more government departments either refuse the information on vague reasons like national interest or do not give a reply. The exemptions with the implementation of Section 8 of the RTI Act have been extended unnecessarily in many cases. In addition, proactive disclosures, which are required under Section 4 to mitigate the necessity of individual applications of RTI, have significantly decreased, which further minimizes transparency.

Threats to RTI users
The threats, harassment, and even killing of the RTI activists have also increased, as witnessed during the period. Lack of an effective whistle-blower protection system has exposed the information seekers to vulnerability, which has demoralized the participation of the population. Such an atmosphere of fear, including the institutional coldness, has helped bring down the number of RTI applications submitted yearly, which is an indicator that it is chasing back the gains of transparency associated with the past decade.

Critical role of Citizens and Civil Society

The existence and applicability of the Right to Information (RTI) Act in India is not solely subject to the guaranteeing of the act by institutions, but especially the involvement of citizens and other players in the civil society.

Democratic Stakeholders
The RTI Act gives people the right to become overseers of government organizations. RTI has been used by citizens to demand accountability in the rendition of services, expose corruption, and keep an eye on the public expenditure. Since the Act gave farmers in rural areas an opportunity to obtain records on the area they farm to the people who live in the cities to demand accountability in their local government budgets, the Act has helped various communities to affirm their rights. This participatory form of government will turn non-active users of state services into active stakeholders, and this will strengthen the rule of democracy at the grassroots level.

Mobilizing Force
Civil society organisations (CSOs) such as NGOs, lobby groups, and community network organisations have been instrumental in making the RTI framework more popular and defensible. These groups have used awareness campaigns, trained the citizens on how to file the application, and offered legal information in cases of denial or retaliation. They have played a key role in marginalized areas in particular, where state opacity overlaps with social exclusion. CSOs are also the mediators between institutions and citizens, and they increase the voices that would have otherwise gone unheard.

Protecting RTI in an Age of Institutional Dilution
This, in conjunction with an increasing institutional cynicism and state dilution of laws, has brought civil society to an onslaught of transparency loss. The weakening of the RTI regime by litigations in the court, media investigations, and organized campaigns has been challenged by the public interest. As an example, the opposition to the 2019 RTI Amendment Act was mainly spearheaded by civil society coalitions, which pointed out the effects that the new law had on the autonomy of Information Commissions. These are the attempts to highlight the importance of collective civic action in the defense of democratic infrastructure.

Promoting the Culture of Responsibility
In addition to the legal systems, the culture of accountability is built by the citizens and civil society. They inculcate the value of transparency into the minds of people by making the deployment of RTI a norm in the day-to-day running of the government, be it tracking of school finances, health plans, or local developments. This cultural transformation plays a key role in supporting democratic principles, particularly in situations where the institutions fail. The very fact that RTI was still applied even in difficult circumstances is an indication of a strong civic culture that advocated for subjecting the administration and conduct to a transparent and moral evaluation.

Safeguarding the Future of RTI

With the RTI Act entering the third decade, its future is dependent on concerted action to regain institutional integrity, upholding civic responsibility, and ensuring restoration of transparency as one of the democratic imperatives in India.

Restoring Institutional Infrastructure
The initial move towards the protection of RTI is the reinstatement of the independence and abilities of Information Commissions. Their quasi-judicial independence should be maintained by reinstating the fixed tenures and making sure that their choice procedures are transparent. Also, the process of RTI can be made more accessible by digitalizing the processes and minimizing bottlenecks in the procedures to speed up grievance redressal, and in underserved areas.

Legal and Policy Safeguards
The RTI model is to be protected against legislative watering down. The latest legislation, like the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, has become the source of worry with regard to undue exemptions and less access to information among people. An intensive review process will be required in order to confirm that the new laws do not contradict the spirit of RTI. The protection of the whistle-blowers and imposing punitive action against infringement of the punishment to the users of the RTI are also important in maintaining the security and validity of information-seeking systems.

Civil Education and civic participation
RTI still depends on public awareness to ensure its sustainability. The culture of informed citizenship can be built through implementing RTI literacy programs within the school curriculum, community outreach programs, and media promotion programs. The civil society bodies should still educate the citizens, particularly those in the rural and marginalized sections, to utilize RTI properly. Transparency can be inculcated in the democratic sphere by making RTI more normal, such as keeping track of local budgets or collecting welfare benefits.

Digging the Tomb of Responsibility
In addition, the protection of RTI involves a cultural change in governance besides law reforms. The transparency should not be considered as a threat, but is a constitutional responsibility of the public officials. Section 4 of the RTI Act on proactive disclosures should be rejuvenated with the departments releasing real-time information on their expenditures, decisions, as well as service delivery. The media, academia, and civil society should also work together to ensure that institutions become accountable and transparency is embraced as a social good.

Conclusion

One of the keys to the Indian democratic structure that allows citizens to make the public institutions accountable and involve them in the commitment to governance is the Right to Information Act 2005. Even though its first ten years were marked with revolutionary advantages in transparency and civic empowerment, the following years have been filled with institutional decline and erosion of its business efficiency. The undermining of the RTI regime has happened through legislative changes, administrative indifference, and threats to information seekers. However, the constant participation of citizens and civil society supports the fact that the Act remains ever relevant. The future of RTI requires a multi-dimensional approach, namely, the renewal of institutional mechanisms, legal protection, and imposing a culture of transparency. The RTI Act is an important element of democracy in a time of growing obscurity and centralized decision-making. Its safeguarding is not just lawful but a moral obligation to define the continuity of participative governance as well as to safeguard the constitutional assurance of the knowledgeable and empowering citizenry.