A decade on, while activists have hailed the progressive aspects of the Right to Information Act, some have called for a more proactive approach from the government.

Ten years ago, the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 was passed as a law ‘to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority.’ A decade on, while activists have hailed the progressive aspects of the Act, some have called for a more proactive approach from the government.

Data from the Central Information Commission suggests that RTI as a way of ensuring public accountability is becoming increasingly popular year by year. A CIC report says that the number of requests pending with public authorities rose from 6,26,748 in 2009-10 to 9,62,630 in 2013-14, an increase of 53.5 percent.

Mumbai-based RTI activist Sunil Ahya says, “On the whole, the right to information appears to be going in the right direction and it is for citizens to take it forward. Public information officers have been appointed to government offices and appointments for appellate authorities have also been made. In present times, the RTI Act is particularly important as the cure for all corruption is transparency.”

However, the RTI application, a new tool of public accountability, appears to have brought about a new set of concerns as well. Data compiled by NGO Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative finds that there have been as many as 289 attacks on RTI activists in India since the law came into being. The actual number could be higher, as the data is based on news reports compiled over a decade.

RTI activist Anil Galgali says, “In several cases, the government and the judiciary have not been proactive in ensuring the protection of RTI activists who expose misdeeds of various departments.” About the attitude of public authorities towards disclosing information, Galgali said, “Government authorities are often reluctant to disclose information to the public. The provisions of exceptional cases under which information can be withheld are sometimes unfairly used to deny information.”

Mohammed Afzal, who has been working on the Right to Information since the provision was introduced in Maharashtra in 2002, cites an instance of an alleged unauthorized construction in west Mumbai, saying, “Public authorities hold the belief that the introduction of RTI has led to a lot of hassle, as they now have an additional charge of responding to applications for information. However, sometimes, people have to file five to six applications on a particular issue to get the information they need. It is amply clear that the high number of applications is only because the public authority is not working properly.”