The Right to Information (RTI) Act in India has undergone a substantial shift from being a powerful tool for citizen empowerment and transparency to a more restricted framework that risks becoming a "right to deny information." This change largely arises from amendments made through the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, which dilute key safeguards in the RTI Act and expand the scope for authorities to withhold information under the pretext of privacy protection.

Key Drivers of the Shift

• Amendment of Section 8(1)(j) via DPDP Act: Originally, this section only allowed denial of personal information if it was unrelated to public activity or would result in unwarranted invasion of privacy, with an exception for cases involving larger public interest. The amendment drastically simplifies this by vaguely defining “personal information,” making it easier for public authorities to deny requests without considering public interest.
• Expansion of ‘Personal Information’ Definition: The DPDP Act now treats virtually all data linked to individuals, organizations, or even the State as “personal,” vastly expanding what can be withheld from public scrutiny.
• Penalties Under DPDP Act: The introduction of severe penalties (up to ₹250 crore) for wrongful disclosure has made Public Information Officers (PIOs) overly cautious, aggravating the culture of denial.

Impact on Transparency and Accountability

• Restriction on Access: Information earlier accessible—such as marksheets, pension lists, service records, or even signed orders—can now be denied on privacy grounds, even if disclosure serves public interest.
• Weakening Anti-Corruption Efforts: RTI was vital for exposing scams and holding officials accountable. With the broadened definition of “personal information,” authorities can withhold records that could expose wrongdoing.
• Implication for Civil Society and Media: Journalists, activists, and civil society have expressed grave concerns, warning that denial of government information impedes scrutiny and weakens democratic oversight.

Criticisms

Violation of Constitutional Guarantees: Critics argue the amendments undermine the spirit of Article 19(1)(a)—the right to freedom of speech and expression—by restricting citizen access to government information.
Unnecessary Intervention: Many experts believe that the RTI Act already balanced privacy with transparency through its public interest test, making the amendment redundant and regressive.

Way Forward

Reinforcing Commitment to Transparency: Civil society calls for restoring the original safeguards in Section 8(1)(j), robust protection for RTI activists, and a renewed emphasis on democratic accountability.
Rethinking the Balance: Policymakers are urged to reconsider the expanded privacy regime and ensure that transparency remains the default mode, except in clear, narrowly defined cases of genuine privacy concern.
The shift from a “Right to Information” towards a "Right to Deny" signals a critical regression—weakening citizen oversight and accountability and risking increased opacity in Indian governance.

Download Pdf