Unnecessary change: RTI Act amendment, Pg 6

1. Context of the Amendment

• Govt amended Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act via Section 44(3) of DPDP Act 2023.
• Original RTI clause allowed withholding of personal info unless public interest overruled privacy.
• New change removes this safeguard, allowing authorities to deny public info solely citing personal nature.

2. Background

• The amendment stems from K.S. Puttaswamy (2017) case on privacy rights.
• Govt claims it balances RTI misuse and right to privacy.
• Critics argue it contradicts intent of RTI Act, which focused on public scrutiny.

3. Concerns Raised

• Public servants' info (e.g., fake caste certificate cases) could now be classified and hidden.
• Section 44(3) dilutes transparency provisions essential for citizen oversight.

4. Opposition & Civil Society Stand

• Letter by Jairam Ramesh calls amendment unwarranted and regressive.
• Transparency activists warn it may lead to reduced public accountability.

Significance

• Undermines 20-year-old RTI legacy of empowering citizens.
• Weakens one of the strongest tools for anti-corruption and public interest governance.

Analysis & Way Forward

• Govt must define "personal" narrowly, ensuring public interest is preserved.
• Safeguards must be reintroduced through consultations with civil society and legal experts.

Mains Mock Question:

"Do you think the recent amendments to the RTI Act via the DPDP Act undermine the spirit of transparency in governance? Critically analyse."