The Significance of 2019 RTI Amendment in the Landscape of Information Commissioners
The Right to Information (RTI) Act was introduced in 2005 to enhance transparency in governmental and administrative operations. Its primary objective was to minimize misuse of authority and corrupt practices by ensuring citizens have access to information. RTI acts as a crucial tool of citizen empowerment, enabling individuals to demand accountability and transparency from government agencies.
Changes in Terms of Office and Salaries of Information Commissioners
The Right to Information Amendment Act 2019 has made significant changes to the original act, particularly in relation to the terms of office and salaries of Information Commissioners. The amendments introduce several shifts in the original provisions.
New Provisions for Terms of Office
Previously, the original act stated that the term of office for the Central Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners would be five years or until the age of 65, whichever came first. The 2019 amendment changed this provision, stating that the appointment of these individuals will be “for such term as may be prescribed by the Central Government.” This shift gives the government more control over the tenure of these officials, potentially allowing them to extend or reduce their terms based on political considerations or other factors.
Salary and Other Terms of Service Adjustments
The original act prescribed that the salaries and terms of service of the Chief Information Commissioner shall be the same as that of the Chief Election Commissioner, while those of an Information Commissioner shall be the same as that of an Election Commissioner. The 2019 amendment now states that the salaries and other terms of service of both the Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners “shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government.” This change allows for greater control over the financial and operational aspects of these positions, potentially reducing their independence from the government.
Impact on the Autonomy of Information Commissioners
The amendments, while not directly affecting the powers of RTI officials, indirectly impact their independence from government influence. The government's argument for this amendment is based on the premise that since Election Commissioners are constitutional bodies, their service conditions cannot be applied to Information Commissioners, who are statutory bodies created by an act of Parliament. However, this logic may not fully align with the primary objectives of the RTI act, which require the independence of Information Commissioners from government control.
Historically, there have been instances where government agencies have been reluctant to provide information that might expose their wrongdoing. This reluctance to disclose information can undermine the effectiveness of the RTI act. The 2019 amendment may exacerbate this issue by placing the control of the service conditions of Information Commissioners in the hands of the government, potentially diminishing their autonomy.
Conclusion: The Importance of Independence in the RTI Framework
Ultimately, the 2019 RTI amendment brings new challenges to ensuring transparency and accountability through the act. Maintaining the independence and effectiveness of Information Commissioners is crucial for the RTI framework to function as intended. As the government exercises greater control over their terms of office and salaries, it is important to monitor how this affects the integrity and independence of the RTI machinery. Strict adherence to the spirit of the RTI act, prioritizing the empowerment of citizens, remains essential in navigating these changes.