Recently, the Supreme Court slammed the Centre and States for delay in appointing Information Commissioners to decide citizens’ rights under the Right to Information Act. 

Challenges to the RTI Act

• Dilution Through Amendments: Amendments to dilute the efficacy of RTI  and attempts to defeat it by delaying or denying information have been quite common for years. 
• Issue of Vacancies : Functioning of information commissions at the central and state levels is hampered. Vacancies remain unfilled, rendering commissions ineffective.
  • The Central Information Commission (CIC) has eight vacancies, with 23,000 pending appeals. 
  • Several state-level commissions are nearly defunct due to a lack of members. The Court questioned how these institutions could function effectively without sufficient personnel.

Directives given by the Court

• Central Level: It directed the Department of Personnel and Training to provide timelines for completing the selection process and notifying appointments. It also sought details on the search committee and the list of applicants for the CIC posts.
• State Level: It directed the  states with ongoing appointment processes to complete them within a specified timeframe.

Check Out UPSC NCERT Textbooks From PW Store

Observations highlighted by the Courts

• Non compliance: Besides filling up vacancies, not all governments have complied with a Court verdict of 2019 that called for proactive efforts to fill up vacancies in time by advertising them early. 
• Removal of Fixed Tenure: The CIC’s post was stripped of its autonomy some years ago when the government removed the fixed five-year tenure and made it open-ended. 
• Lack of Diversity: Not much has been done to appoint candidates from various walks of life, as retired civil servants continue to be chosen, a point noted by the Bench in the latest hearing. 
• Impact of Vacancies: It is inevitable that a large number of vacancies will result in a huge backlog and ultimately discourage the people from seeking information.

Conclusion

The lack of urgency in filling vacancies and ensuring diversity in appointments threatens the original purpose of the RTI Act. A stronger commitment to transparency and timely action is needed to revive its intended impact.

DOWNLOAD PDF