The Hindu : Opinion / Editorials : Accountability & the right to information

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, May 14, 2005

Opinion

Opinion - Editorials

Accountability & the right to information

The Right to Information Bill, 2005 goes a long way in putting together a comprehensive mechanism for citizens to secure information under the control of the Government and thereby (as the statement of objects and reasons asserts) promotes "transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority." This landmark legislation is a radical improvement on the relatively weak and ineffective statute it seeks to replace, the Freedom of Information Act, 2002. The new legislation unequivocally confers on all citizens the right of access to information and, correspondingly, makes the dissemination of such information an obligation for all public authorities. An outstanding feature of the Bill is the provision for Information Commissions — independent high-level bodies at both the Central and the State levels that are dedicated to encouraging the citizen's right to know and enforcing the provisions of the Act. By empowering these Commissions to act as appellate authorities and by vesting them with the powers of a civil court, these bodies have been given the teeth to discourage public authorities from refusing to part with information.

Although it is based substantially on the bold draft prepared by the National Advisory Council headed by Sonia Gandhi, the Right to Information Bill contains a few provisions that have diluted its effectiveness. The provision in the original draft that criminal liability, with punishment by imprisonment, would extend to those who furnished false information or those who destroyed it has been deleted. Another important change relates to the selection of the Information Commissioner and his or her deputies. The draft Bill envisaged their selection by a team comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and the Chief Justice of India (CJI). However, the Bill as passed by the two Houses has amended the draft to replace the CJI with "a Union Cabinet Minister to be nominated by the PM," thus making the selection process somewhat more partisan. These and some other flaws in the Bill should not detract from the fact that it is a substantial improvement over the Freedom of Information Act and other `freedom of information laws' passed by various States from 1997 onwards. While the right to know is not explicitly spelt out in the Constitution, the Supreme Court has held in several cases that this right is inherent in the right to freedom of speech and expression (Article 19) as well as the right to life and liberty (Article 21). The effectiveness of the Right to Information Act will depend substantially on how prepared the Central and State Governments are in implementing it — in both letter and spirit. The very fact that it will be in the statute books will send out an important message to all public authorities. The disclosure of information is no longer a transgression but an obligation. Conversely, its withholding is no longer a virtue but an offence.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion