DNA Edit: Controversial tweaks - There is no cogent explanation for RTI amendments

Purveyors of the Right to Information are dismayed. With the passing of the RTI amendment in Lok Sabha, they are predicting that the death knell has been sounded for India’s very own and original sunshine legislation promulgated in 2005.

There can be little doubt that the RTI introduced by the Congress-led UPA government was a milestone in democracy. In a world where countries even look down upon holding elections, such transparency marked a new beginning in Indian politics. So it is difficult to figure out the compulsions of the Modi government in introducing two potentially controversial tweaks to the RTI law.

The first refers to the tenure of the information commissioners, which stood at a fixed five years. If the new RTI bill becomes law after the Rajya Sabha clears it, the tenures will be decided by the government. The second is the quantum of salaries, which were set at levels equivalent to the election commissioners. Now, the government will decide who gets how much.

There is a hint of government mala fide, mainly because no cogent reply was available with government and party spokespersons defending the amendments. The fact is that the new amendments dilute a well laid down constitutional arrangement. Having said that, even in the system such as it existed, and constitutional safeguards notwithstanding, governments were free to handpick their bureaucrats as information commissioners, both at the Centre and states.

So while the beginnings of the RTI system were edifying, government replies to RTI queries began to sound like evasive parliamentary replies. At present, over 25,000 cases are filed with the Commission annually — a quantum jump from roughly 15,000 ten years ago. This reflects the people’s faith in a system, which needs to be upgraded all the time.