Right To Information Act vs Legislations for Non Disclosure of
Information
Some provisions of the Indian Evidence Act (Sections 123, 124, and 162)
provide to hold the disclosure of documents.
Under these provisions, head of department may refuse to provide
information on affairs of state and only swearing that it is a state
secret will entitle not to disclose the information.
In a similar manner no public officer shall be compelled to disclose
communications made to him in official confidence.
The Atomic Energy Act, 1912 provides that it shall be an offence to
disclose information restricted by the Central Government.
The Central Civil Services Act provides a government servant not to
communicate or part with any official documents except in accordance
with a general or special order of government.
The Official Secrets Act, 1923 provides that any government official can
mark a document as confidential so as to prevent its publication.
Difference between Right to Information and Right to Privacy
The right to privacy and the right to information are both essential human rights
in modern society where technological information breach is very common.
These two rights complement each other in holding governments accountable to
individuals in a majority of the cases.
Right to Information provides a fundamental right for any person to access
information held by government bodies. At the same time, the right to privacy
laws grants individuals a fundamental right to control the collection of, access
to, and use of personal information about them that is held by governments and
private bodies.
Exemptions The most difficult and perhaps the most controversial part of the
Act is the application of exemptions. Public Information Officer (PIO) can
only reject a request under Sections 8 and 9. Section 7 (1) of the RTI Act
states as follows: “…the Central Public Information Officer … on receipt of
a request under Section 6 shall, … either provide the information … or reject
the request for any of the reasons specified in Sections 8 and 9 …” Section 8
and Section 9 of the Act contain these exemptions. Exemptions can be
divided into two categories: • Absolute exemptions: Exemptions which are
not subject to public interest test. Section 9 is the only absolute exemption. •
Qualified exemptions: Exemptions which are subject to public interest test.
Here, the PIO must consider whether there is greater public interest in
disclosing the information or withholding the information (popularly called -
balancing the public interest). All the exemptions under Section 8(1) are
qualified exemptions. Exemptions under Section 8 are discretionary, not
mandatory. PIOs may make discretionary disclosures of exempt information,
as a matter of their discretion,
Exemption from disclosure of information.Previous Next
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no
obligation to give any citizen,--
(a) information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the
sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific
or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or
lead to incitement of an offence;
(b) information which has been expressly forbidden to be
published by any court of law or tribunal or the disclosure of
which may constitute contempt of court;
(c) information, the disclosure of which would cause a breach of
privilege of Parliament or the State Legislature;
(d) information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or
intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the
competitive position of a third party, unless the competent
authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the
disclosure of such information;
(e) information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship,
unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public
interest warrants the disclosure of such information;
(f) information received in confidence from foreign Government;
(g) information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or
physical safety of any person or identify the source of information
or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security
purposes;
(h) information which would impede the process of investigation
or apprehension or prosecution of offenders;
(i) cabinet papers including records of deliberations of the Council
of Ministers, Secretaries and other officers:
Provided that the decisions of Council of Ministers, the reasons
thereof, and the material on the basis of which the decisions were
taken shall be made public after the decision has been taken, and
the matter is complete, or over:
Provided further that those matters which come under the
exemptions specified in this section shall not be disclosed;
(j) information which relates to personal information the
disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or
interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the
privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information
Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate
authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public
interest justifies the disclosure of such information:
Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the
Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any
person.
(2) Notwithstanding anything in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19
of 1923) nor any of the exemptions permissible in accordance
with sub-section (1), a public authority may allow access to
information, if public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to
the protected interests.
(3) Subject to the provisions of clauses (a), (c) and (i) of sub-
section (1), any information relating to any occurrence, event or
matter which has taken place, occurred or happened twenty
years before the date on which any request is made under section
6 shall be provided to any person making a request under that
section:
Provided that where any question arises as to the date from which
the said period of twenty years has to be computed, the decision
of the Central Government shall be final, subject to the usual
appeals provided for in this Act.
“Notwithstanding transparency of governance, certain information’s have
been exempted from disclosure under the rights to information Act, 2005.”
Discuss the relevant provisions and limitations on disclosure of information.
UPSC 2017.
Right to information under RTI Act 2005 is not absolute, it can be legitimately
restricted in exceptional circumstances.
In the case of Rakesh Sanghi v. International Advanced Centre for Powder
Metallurgy & New Materials, Hyderabad,wherein the CIC held that the citizen’s right
to seek information is not absolute but is conditioned by the Government’s right to
invoke exemptions, wherever such exemption applicable. CIC noted that no canon of
transparency or public interest would justify that Research and technological
Institutions part with their research data or vital information without expecting to
benefit tangibly or intangibly from such exchange/disclosure.
Section 8 and 9 of the Act enumerate the categories of information which are exempt
from disclosure.
Section 8(1) lists all of the exemptions:
(a) information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the security,
sovereignty and integrity of India;
(b) information which may constitute contempt of court;
(c) information that would cause a breach of privilege of Parliament or the State
Legislature;
(d) information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual
property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party,
unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the
disclosure of such information;
(e) information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the
competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure
of such information;
(f) information received in confidence from foreign government;
(g) information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of
any person;
(h) information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or
prosecution of offenders;
(i) cabinet papers including records of deliberations, which come under the specified
exemptions;
(j) information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has not
relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted
invasion of the privacy.
Section 8(2) Notwithstanding anything in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923)
nor any of the exemptions permissible in accordance with sub-section (1), a public
authority may allow access to information, if public interest in disclosure outweighs
the harm to the protected interests
Section 24 read with Schedule 2 contains the 22 organizations names of the
Intelligence and Security organizations which are exempt from the purview of the
Act. However, these agencies do not enjoy absolute immunity. These agencies have
to provide information regarding any allegation of corruption or act of human right
violation sought by citizens.
Discuss the rationale of exemption to disclosure of information endangering
life and the information regarding criminal trial and criminal investigation
provided under the Right to Information Act, 2005 in the light of decided cases.
UPSC 2020.
Section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act : If the disclosure would endanger the life and
physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance
given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes, then public authority is
exempted from disclosure of such information.
Meaning of LIFE under Article 21 is given an expansive and liberal
construction such as to include, the right to live with dignity, right to shelter,
right to basic needs and even the right to reputation. This meaning is
applicable for section 8(1)(g) the RTI Act.
‘PHYSICAL SAFETY’ means the likelihood of assault to physical existence of
a person.
Information putting an individual's safety or liberty at risk, e.g., the identity of
people who blow the whistle on corruption inside their organization should be
protected, because otherwise they may be targeted for discrimination or even
violence.
CASE LAWS :
1. In CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND ANR. V. ADITYA
BANDOPADHYAY AND ORS, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that
access to evaluated copies can be allowed only to the extent of answer-book
which does not contain any information or signature or initials of the
examiners/coordinators/ scrutinizers/head examiners disclosing their identity.
2. In BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION V. SAIYED HUSSAIN ABBAS
RIZWI, marks obtained by the a person can be disclosed but the disclosure of
individual names and marks they awarded would be hardly hold relevancy
either to the concept of transparency or for proper exercise of the right to
information within the limitation of the Act.
Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act : Public authority is not under obligation to furnish
information that would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or
prosecution of offenders.
Definition of “investigation‟ under CrPC can be applicable for RTI Act also. It
would mean all actions of law enforcement, disciplinary proceedings,
enquiries, adjudications and so on.
When the investigation is in progress, be information which needs to be
protected, such as witnesses’ identities, circumstances being put together
against a suspect, etc. cannot be disclosed.
CASE LAWS :
1. In B.S. MATHUR V. PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OF DELHI HIGH
COURT, the High Court of Delhi has held that mere pendency of an
investigation or inquiry is by itself not a sufficient justification for withholding
information. It must be shown that the disclosure of the information sought
would impede or even on a lesser threshold, hamper or interfere with the
investigation
2. In SARVESH KAUSHAL V. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND
OTHERS, the Central Information Commission has held that documents
relating to the departmental enquiry are exempted from disclosure pending
departmental enquiry by virtue of Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
