25 February 2025 : The Hindu Editorial Analysis

The Hindu Editorial: February 25, 2025.

1. The RTI is now the ‘right to deny information’

(Source – The Hindu, International Edition – Page No. – 8)

Introduction and Initial Hope

• The introduction of the RTI Act created hope among citizens by recognizing their right to access government information.
• It was considered one of the best transparency laws in the world, aiming to curb corruption and arbitrariness.
• Citizens were expected to act as vigilance monitors over government actions.
• However, over time, the implementation of the Act has not met public expectations, and democratic accountability has not significantly improved.

Early Resistance from the Government

• The government quickly realized that the RTI Act shifted power from public servants to citizens.
• Within a year, attempts were made to amend the Act in ways that would weaken it.
• Widespread public protests led to the withdrawal of these amendments.

Erosion of the RTI Mechanism

• Information Commissions were established as the final appellate authorities for RTI implementation.
• Most commissioner positions were filled by retired bureaucrats who were reluctant to empower citizens.
• The selection process did not prioritize individuals with expertise in transparency and governance.
• Many commissioners viewed their roles as post-retirement benefits and worked with limited commitment.

Delays and Inefficiency in RTI Processing

• High Court judges dispose of over 2,500 cases per year, but RTI commissioners clear far fewer cases.
• Given the simpler nature of RTI cases, each commissioner should ideally handle over 5,000 cases annually.
• The law mandates a 30-day response period for government departments, but no deadline exists for Information Commissions.
• This has led to a backlog, often delaying responses for over a year, making information irrelevant by the time it is received.
• Citizens often struggle to continue pursuing delayed cases, weakening the Act’s effectiveness.

Weak Enforcement of RTI Penal Provisions

• The RTI Act includes provisions for penalizing officers who deny information.
• Many commissioners hesitate to impose penalties, leading to a lack of accountability.
• Governments further weaken the system by delaying the appointment of new commissioners, increasing case backlogs.

Judicial Interpretations and Their Impact

• Courts have ruled that the exemptions under Section 8 of the RTI Act should not be interpreted strictly.
• In a key judgment, the Supreme Court emphasized that indiscriminate RTI requests could hinder administration and national development.
• This ruling led to a perception that RTI usage is problematic, discouraging officials from responding to requests.

Impact of Personal Information Clause

• Another major ruling restricted access to personal information of public officials.
• An RTI applicant had sought details about actions taken against a public servant, but the request was denied under the personal information exemption.
• The court did not examine whether the information was related to public activity or if disclosure was in public interest.
• This ruling ignored a key provision stating that information accessible to Parliament should also be accessible to the public.
• As a result, this decision has been used as a precedent in multiple cases to deny information.

Concerns Over Legislative Changes

• The Digital Personal Data Protection Act has further weakened the RTI Act by restricting access to information.
• The trend of judicial and legislative changes is shifting RTI towards becoming a Right to Deny Information (RDI).

Conclusion

• To preserve the RTI Act’s original purpose, citizens and the media must actively defend it.
• Without public vigilance, fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution may be diluted. 

2. Fencing out interfaith relationships in the new India

(Source – The Hindu, International Edition – Page No. – 4)

Uttarakhand Implements Uniform Civil Code (UCC)

• The stated aim is to promote gender justice and uniformity in personal laws.
• However, the implementation raises concerns about increased state control over private relationships.
• Combined with anti-conversion laws, it could lead to greater restrictions on interfaith relationships.

Existing Barriers to Interfaith Marriages

• Interfaith marriages in India already face significant societal resistance.
• A 2014 survey of 70,000 people found that fewer than 10% of urban Indians had family members who married outside their caste.
• Interfaith marriages were even rarer, with only 5% of urban respondents reporting such unions in their families.
• The Special Marriage Act, 1954, requires a 30-day notice period, allowing public objections and scrutiny.
• Anti-conversion laws in multiple states add further legal obstacles for those converting for marriage.

Legal Hurdles and Bureaucratic Challenges

• Conversion for marriage now requires multiple administrative steps, such as declarations, waiting periods, and approvals.
• These legal requirements have emboldened vigilante groups, who use them to intervene in personal relationships.
• In one state, 63 out of 101 complaints under the anti-conversion law against Christians were filed by third-party groups.
• Instead of safeguarding individuals, these laws create an environment where legal systems and police authorities can be misused.

Increased Scrutiny on Live-in Relationships

• The UCC introduces new rules for live-in relationships, making them subject to legal registration.
• Couples must submit a 16-page application, provide identification, and obtain approval from community or religious leaders.
• Family members must be informed of their relationship, adding to potential risks.
• Failure to register can lead to six months of imprisonment and a ₹25,000 fine.
• These measures particularly affect interfaith couples, making it difficult to live together without interference.

Impact of These Laws

1. Strengthening Traditional Religious Institutions
   • Religious leaders gain legal power over personal relationships.
   • This contradicts constitutional guarantees of individual freedom in a secular democracy.
2. Increased Control Over Women
   • Women in interfaith relationships are often seen as manipulated rather than having agency.
   • Legal notifications to families increase the risk of coercion and honor-based violence.
3. Legalizing Vigilantism
   • Right-wing groups use legal frameworks to monitor and interfere in personal relationships.
   • The requirement for public notices and approvals enables these groups to track and harass couples.

Growing Trend Across States

• The implementation of UCC in Uttarakhand could serve as a model for other states.
• Rajasthan has introduced similar proposals for live-in relationship registration.
• Gujarat is also considering drafting a UCC along similar lines.
• These developments indicate a trend toward greater regulation of personal relationships.

Impact on Society

• The combined effect of UCC and anti-conversion laws could lead to social segregation.
• Laws that restrict interfaith unions create legal barriers at multiple levels.
• These legal measures may undermine the pluralistic nature of Indian society.
• By restricting personal choices, they interfere with the fundamental rights of individuals. 

Read more – 24 February 2025 : The Hindu Editorial Analysis