The RTI Amendment Bill 2019

inbatv Uncategorized

According to the official gazette issued by the government of India

The following Act of Parliament received the assent of the President on the 15th June, 2005, and is hereby published for general information:—

 THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005 No. 22 of 2005 [15th June, 2005.] An Act to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority, the constitution of a Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.[1]

The RTI Act requires Public Authorities to make disclosures on their structure and functioning.  This includes:

  • Disclosure on their organization, functions, and structure,
  • Powers and duties of its officers and employees,
  • Financial information. 

 The Lok Sabha had passed the RTI Amendment Bill, 2019 earlier on July 22, 2019 through a voice vote with 218 votes in favor and 79 against. The bill proposes to amend the terms for holding the office, salaries and other conditions of the Chief Information Commissioner, Information Commissioners and the State Chief Information Commissioner, State information commissioners that now will be decided by the Central Government. The Bill removes the provision that the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) and Information Commissioners (ICs) will hold their offices for a term of 5 years rather than the state  the central government will notify the term of office for the CIC and the ICs.

According to the RTI Act 2005, the salary of the CIC and ICs (at the central level) was equivalent to the salary paid to the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners, respectively and the salary of the CIC and ICs (at the state level) will be equivalent to the salary paid to the Election Commissioners and the Chief Secretary to the state government, respectively. The amendment bill proposes that the salaries, allowances, and other terms and conditions of service of the central and state CIC and ICs will be determined by the central government.

Though it is debatable as to whether this step of amending the RTI Act 2005 is correct or not. Like a coin, every step has two sides. In this case it can be looked through the people for it or against it

Looking through the point of view of the people against it, seems that the central is destroying the federal structure by overpowering the State officials and having full control of their term, salaries and other conditions and as the same is devoid of any merit whatsoever. This step will however weaken the institution and will affect the ability to perform independently and it will be unfair to construe that the same can be used by the central government to wield influence on the authorities. This amendment also took the status equal of the ICs to the chief election commissioner and election commissioners (ECs), which also puts them at par with judges of the Supreme Court insofar as salaries, allowances, and other terms and conditions of service are concerned.[2]

Congress leader Sonia Gandhi has alleged that the amendment has been proposed with a view to “destroy [the CIC’s] status and independence” (Hindu 2019).

Looking through the point of view of those who are for it , this amendment has reduced the distance between the state officials and the central officials (CIC,IC and SCIC,SIC) and it has also bought them under the same authority which would prevent clashes between the two. This amendment has determined the terms of office holding which can be seen as a positive thing as the State official cannot use their powers in a dismissive manner.

The government claims its aim is to ‘rationalize’ the status of the authorities. It argues that while the Chief Election Commissioner is a constitutional functionary, the CIC is only a statutory authority. And while the CEC is equal in status to a Supreme Court judge, it would be incongruous for the CIC to enjoy the same status as the CIC’s orders are subject to judicial review by the high courts.

He also spoke about the fixation of the tenure of Information Commissioners, he clarified “that it is never mentioned in the amendment that the Government will change it after every two years, as alleged by the Opposition.”

The minister said that this was based on the principle of ‘maximum governance, minimum government’.



[1]https://rti.gov.in/rtiact.asp

[2]https://www.epw.in/journal/2019/30/law-and-society/true-dangers-rti-amendment-bill.html



By-

SamairaNakra

Student Reporter, INBA