The Right to Information Act 2005 is being hollowed out by vacancies and the 2019 amendment. Evaluate.
Subtopic: Governance · Transparency & RTI
How to structure your answer
Introduction: The RTI Act 2005 made information a statutory right flowing from Article 19(1)(a), as recognised in S.P. Gupta (1981) and Raj Narain (1975).
Body: Three dimensions — (i) statutory architecture — PIO at every public authority, time-bound disclosure, CIC and SICs as appellate bodies; (ii) the RTI (Amendment) Act 2019 took CIC tenure and salary out of statute and into rules, eroding independence; (iii) Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India (2019) flagged systemic vacancies — the CIC and several SICs run with sanctioned strength unfilled.
Way forward / Conclusion: Restore statutory tenure and salaries, automate proactive disclosure under Section 4, and ring-fence the appointments collegium — the prescription of the Satark Nagrik Sangathan reports.
Written within the word limit
138 words · target 150 words · 9 min
Introduction: The Right to Information Act 2005 made information a statutory right flowing from Article 19(1)(a), recognised in State of U.P. v. Raj Narain (1975) and S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981).
Body: Three dimensions show the hollowing. First, the statutory architecture — PIOs in every public authority, Section 7's thirty-day rule and the Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions as appellate bodies — is intact on paper. Second, the RTI (Amendment) Act 2019 moved the CIC's tenure and salary from statute to government rules, eroding independence. Third, Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India (2019) flagged systemic vacancies, with the CIC and several SICs running below sanctioned strength, while the Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 has further narrowed Section 8(1)(j).
Conclusion: Restore statutory tenure, automate Section 4 proactive disclosure (Jan Soochna Portal model) and ring-fence the appointments collegium to revive the 2005 promise.
What an examiner expects to see
- RTI Act 2005 — Section 4 proactive disclosure, Section 6 application, Section 7 thirty-day rule
- Article 19(1)(a) basis recognised in State of U.P. v. Raj Narain (1975) and S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981)
- RTI (Amendment) Act 2019 — CIC tenure and salary moved from statute to rules
- Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India (2019) on CIC vacancies
- Section 8 exemptions and Section 24 intelligence-agency exclusion
- Whistle Blowers Protection Act 2014 — unenforced supporting law
- Jan Soochna Portal Rajasthan as Section 4 model
Concrete cases, schemes and judgments
- Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India (2019)
- CIC vacancy crisis 2024–2025
- Jan Soochna Portal, Rajasthan (2019)
- Satark Nagrik Sangathan RTI report cards
- Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 — amendment to Section 8(1)(j) of RTI