On October 12, 2005, India’s Right to Information (RTI) Act came fully into force, marking a turning point in the country’s governance model. Aimed at promoting transparency, accountability and empowering ordinary citizens, the RTI law promised to transform public institutions by making access to government-held information a legal right, rather than a discretionary privilege.
Origins and Purpose
The RTI Act was born of long-standing demands from civil society, activists, and media for openness in governance. Before RTI, there were piecemeal arrangements and freedom of information efforts, but nothing with legally enforceable teeth. The law was intended to:
- Ensure citizens can request information from public authorities and receive responses within a fixed time frame.
- Establish independent Information Commissions (both Central and State) to adjudicate disputes where information was denied or delayed.
- Bring into the public domain decisions, files, and data so as to reduce corruption, enable oversight, and strengthen democratic accountability.
In its early years, RTI was hailed as a “sunshine law” which is a means to cast light on government decisions, mis-expenditures, nepotism, and more. It was put to use by journalists, social activists, NGOs, and ordinary citizens asking questions ranging from budgetary allocations and school performance to welfare scheme implementation.
Achievements Over Two Decades
The RTI law has delivered substantial gains:
- Empowerment of Citizens
Many citizens who never had access to official records, audit reports or even basic public documents have leveraged RTI to obtain that information. It has enabled grassroots oversight: villagers asking for records of works in their community, or beneficiaries in welfare schemes discovering discrepancies. - Exposing Wrongdoing
RTI disclosures have been central to uncovering corruption and mismanagement. Numerous scams and irregularities have come to light because someone asked the right question under RTI. - Improving Accountability & Governance
The law has made government bodies more cautious: knowing that requests can come from anyone has implied that decisions, expenditures, and file trails have to be better documented. It has helped promote record-keeping culture in many public authorities. - Legislative & Judicial Interplay
The RTI Act has been interpreted, clarified, and occasionally limited via court judgments. These legal precedents have shaped what counts as permissible disclosure, what exemptions exist, and the balance between privacy, security, etc. - Civil Society & Active Citizenship
The RTI movement has fostered a culture of active citizenship. NGOs, citizen groups, watchdogs and media act as facilitators, informers, sometimes litigants. RTI has become part of civil society’s armoury for demanding good governance.
Continuing Challenges
Despite its successes, the journey has also revealed serious and growing challenges over 20 years:
- Backlog and Delays
One of the foremost concerns is the backlog of appeals and complaints. Over the years, the number of pending cases with Information Commissions (Central and State) has swelled. Many requests wait for year(s) before a resolution. For instance, recent reports show over 4 lakh (400,000+) appeals and complaints pending as of mid-2025. Several State Information Commissions are non-functional for periods of time. - Vacancies in Information Commissions
The Information Commissions (ICs) are often understaffed, or lack appointed chairs/commissioners. This slows down their functioning, increases delay, and reduces citizens’ access to justice and remedy. In some states, commissions have been defunct for months or years. - Dilution via Judicial Interpretations and Amendments
Some court judgments have narrowed the scope of disclosure in certain instances (for example, around exemptions, privacy, cabinet papers). Also, legislative changes like amendments or related laws (e.g. those touching on personal data protection) sometimes affect how transparent the system remains in practice. Critics argue this leads to a slow erosion of RTI’s original promise. - Implementation & Compliance Gaps
Even when information is technically available under RTI, in many cases public information officers delay or provide incomplete responses. The mechanism to penalize or hold accountable those who fail to comply is used sparingly. Sometimes PIOs make procedural excuses. Sometimes citizens lack awareness of remedies. - Risks to Activists & Misuse Concerns
There are valid concerns about misuse of RTI (for frivolous or vexatious requests), and also serious reports of harassment or threats to RTI activists. The law does provide safeguards, but their enforcement and protection mechanisms are often weak.
Looking Ahead: What Needs to be Done
To preserve and strengthen what RTI has achieved, the following steps are crucial:
- Timely Appointment & Full Strength Commissions
Ensuring that Information Commissions are fully staffed and that appointments do not get delayed indefinitely. - Faster Disposal of Appeals & Complaints
Process improvements, better resource allocations, perhaps use of technology and online platforms to reduce delays. - Protecting and Clarifying the Scope of Disclosure
Ensuring that exemptions are not misinterpreted; that judgments narrowing access are revisited; that laws around privacy/data protection do not become cover for secrecy. - Awareness & Capacity Building
Many citizens still don’t know how to make RTI requests, or how to appeal. Strengthening awareness, simplifying procedures, helping vulnerable groups access RTI can expand its reach. - Ensuring Accountability of Public Information Officers
Penalties under the RTI Act should be more consistently applied for non-compliance. Better monitoring of how PIOs respond is needed. - Safety & Support for RTI Activists
Ensuring legal and institutional protection for those who use RTI to expose wrongdoing.
Conclusion
Twenty years since the full inauguration of the Right to Information Act, India has a mixed legacy: RTI has undeniably empowered citizens, exposed wrongdoings, forced institutional accountability, and made government more transparent in many respects. But the promise remains only partially fulfilled. Delays, institutional vacancies, judicial narrowing, and implementation gaps threaten to weaken RTI’s effectiveness.
As the law enters its third decade, India faces a deciding moment: whether to let RTI decline toward a “sunset mode,” or to reinvest in it legally, institutionally, socially so that it continues to live up to its founding ideals. In a democracy, transparency isn’t an optional extra; it’s essential. The coming years must decide whether the law remains a beacon of people’s right to know, or fades under neglect and erosion.
Sources:
- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/rti-completes-19-years-today-appeals-complaints-backlog-crosses-4-lakh-mark/articleshow/114158261.cms?utm_
- https://www.deccanherald.com/amp/story/india%2F20-years-of-rti-43-lakh-appeals-and-complaints-pending-in-cicssics-3758216?utm_
- https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/citizenrights/20-yrs-of-rti-act-marred-by-vacancies-delays?utm_
More Current affairs: https://learnproacademy.in/updates/