INTRODUCTION: September 28 is celebrated internationally as the Right to Know Day. Despite the fact that India won its battle for independence in 1947 making democracy its weapon, unfortunately the truth was otherwise. Power was handed over to politicians and democrats, not the common man then. In India, following a national campaign led by grassroots and civil society organizations, the government passed a landmark Right to Information Act in 2005. It is an Act “to establish the practical regime of the right to information for citizens”. RTI requires a timely response to government information requests from citizens. It is an initiative taken by the Personnel and Training Department of the Ministry of Personnel, Public Complaints and Pensions to provide an RTI portal to citizens for quick information search.

The idea that the government withholds information from the public has become outdated. Over the past decade, many countries have enacted freedom of information laws. In India, the Official Secrets Act of 1923 was enacted to protect official secrets. The new law aims to disclose information by replacing the ‘culture of secrecy’. It will promote public accountability that will cut down on malpractice, mismanagement, abuse of discretion and bribery, etc.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of RTI is to empower citizens, promote transparency and accountability in the work of the Government. The Law is a great step for citizens to be informed about the activities of the Government. Social activist Aruna Roy has described India’s RTI as “the most fundamental law this country has ever seen”.

EFFECT OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION: As the debate on corruption continues in the country, the RTI Law is rapidly growing as an effective anti-corruption tool.

Jan Lok Pal Bill gained tremendous public support with citizens taking to the streets of Delhi, Bangalore and other cities to express their anger over corruption. Where the RTI has been used by journalists and the media, the law has a broad user base. The prior right to freedom of speech and expression is granted under Article 19(1) of the Constitution, but requires a fair and efficient procedure for freedom of information to work. In the first three years, 2 million RTI applications were filed. The first and best known movement was the Mazdoor Kissan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) movement in Rajasthan for access to village accounts. Case studies and media reports show that RTI is being used to remedy individual grievances, access rights such as ration cards and pensions. The RTI has paved the way for an informed citizenry that would strengthen the democratic government of India. With this Law, we can make use of our right to speak and expressions and control the activities of the Government effectively. The idea of ​​Open Government is becoming a reality with the implementation of the RTI Law. The RTI can be called a success only if the bureaucracy accepts that it has constitutional to serve.

RTI PROVISIONS: Section 3 says that all citizens shall have the right to information. The Law imposes a duty on public authorities to disclose all information. In VSLee V. State of Kerala.. the remedy provided by Parliament is that wherever there is substantial financial support, the People have a right to know or information. Section 4(2) states that any public authority shall take ongoing steps to provide information about your motorcycle to the public. Therefore, authorities have to give information voluntarily so that the public has minimal recourse to use this Law. Public authorities must also disseminate (make known or communicate information to the public through bulletin boards, newspapers, advertisements public, broadcast in the media, the Internet and inspection of public authority offices) information widely in any form that is easily accessible to the public. audience. The information can be obtained by written request or through electronic means in English or Hindi or in the official language of the US 6 area. Here, the person must pay the fees, and if the request cannot be made in writing , Central PIO and State PIO will provide all assistance in making the request in writing. If the information has been provided correctly or on time, it may be available upon appeal or complaint to the US Information Commission (8(a) 1). In The Registrar General VKU Rajasekar, it was held that Section 8 of RTI deals especially with cases of exemption from disclosure or information where such information detrimentally affects the sovereignty and security of India etc. Section 5 says that every public authority shall, within 100 days of the promulgation of the Law, appoint as many officers as Central Public Information Officials or State Public Information Officials.

Section 6 allows the person to obtain information in English or Hindi or the official language of the area from the designated officers. The person does not need to give any reason for the request. Section 7 requires that the request be resolved within 30 days, provided that where the information requested relates to the life or liberty of a person, it must be provided within 48 hours. Section 7(7) before making any decision to provide the information, the designated official shall take into consideration the representation made by the third party U/S 11. Section 7(9) exempts the release of information where it would misdirect the

resources of the public authority or it would be detrimental to the security and preservation of the document in the proceedings. U/S 8, it is important to note that the Law specifies that intelligence and security organizations are exempt from the application of the Law. However, it provides that in the event that the request for information refers to allegations of corruption and violations of human rights, the Law will apply even to such institutions.

RIGHT TO INFORMATION AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT: RTI is a fundamental right as in Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution it is now a well established proposition. It has been discussed by the Supreme Court in Number of cases, it has been read in Article 14 (Right to equality), 19 (1) (a) freedom of expression and Article 21 (Right to life) through cases such as Bennet Coleman v Union of India, Tata Press Ltd. V. Maharashtra Telephone Nigam Ltd. Etc. The same articles were also interpreted in Kharak Singh V. State of UP, Govind V. State of MP, ETC. include within its scope the right to privacy.

A simple reading of Section 11 suggests that for the section to apply, the following three conditions must be met (I) if the PIO is considering disclosing the information (ii) the information relates to the third party (iii) the third party treated the information to be confidential, to consult the third party and to send a notice to that third party. Section 19 provides a two level appeal system: First Appeal and Second Appeal. Any person who is aggrieved by the decision of the Central PIO and the State PIO within 30 days may prefer the First Appeal to the First Appeal Authority. This authority will be an official of higher rank than the central PIO and the state PIO. The appeal can also be made by a third party. The second appeal is filed before the State or Central Information Commission against the decision of the First Appeal Authority. It has to be filed within 90 days. Under Section 19(7), the decision of the Central or State Information Commission is final. Information Commissioners will be eminent persons in public life with extensive knowledge and experience in law, science and technology, social service, management, journalism, media, and governance. In Nirmal Singh Dhiman V. Financial Commissioner of Revenue, Section 23 says that no claim, application or other proceeding shall be considered by any court in respect of any order and no order shall be challenged except on appeal. In case, the complainant was aggravated against the non-provision of information by the Public Information Officer.

CRITICISM: The Law has been criticized for various reasons. Provides information on demand, but does not sufficiently emphasize information on issues related to food, water, the environment, and other survival needs. It does not emphasize active intervention in educating people about their rights to access information. Another thing is to allow file annotations to be excepted except those related to social and development projects. File notes are very important when it comes to government policy making.

CONCLUSION: By enacting the RTI, India has moved from an opaque and arbitrary system of governance to the dawn of an era of greater transparency and a system in which the citizen is empowered. The true Swaraj will come not by the acquisition of authority by a few, but by the acquisition of the ability by all to resist authority when it is abused.

“KNOWLEDGE IS POWER, INFORMATION IS POWER, THE SECRECY OF INFORMATION CAN BE AN ACT OF TYRANNY CAMOUFLAGED AS HUMILITY”.