Day 46 – Q. 3. Do you think the autonomy of the Central Information Commission has been diluted in recent years, thereby weakening its role as a transparency watchdog? Substantiate your answer with reference to legislative and executive concerns. (150 words, 10 marks)

Q. 3. Do you think the autonomy of the Central Information Commission has been diluted in recent years, thereby weakening its role as a transparency watchdog? Substantiate your answer with reference to legislative and executive concerns. (150 words, 10 marks)

Introduction

The Central Information Commission (CIC), established under the RTI Act, 2005, is central to  India’s transparency regime. However, recent legislative amendments and executive actions  raise serious concerns about its institutional autonomy and effectiveness. 

Body 

Mandate and Role of CIC 

1. Final Appellate Authority: It is the final authority to hear appeals related to RTI  applications at the central level. 
2. Ensures Government Accountability: By adjudicating on disclosure of information, it acts  as a transparency watchdog. 
3. Quasi-Judicial Powers: It has powers of a civil court for summoning records and witnesses.
4. Promotes Awareness: CIC promotes RTI awareness and capacity-building among public  authorities and citizens. 
5. Annual Reporting: Submits annual reports to Parliament on the implementation of the  RTI Act. 

However, several legislative and executive developments have raised concerns over dilution  of the Commission’s independence. 

Concerns Regarding Autonomy 

1. RTI Amendment Act, 2019: Made tenure and salary of CIC members subject to executive  rules, removing parity with Election Commissioners and eroding institutional  independence. 
2. Executive Discretion in Appointments: Lack of transparency in selection and delays in  appointments has led to vacancies and pendency. 
3. Downgrading Status: Reduction of CIC’s stature from that of a Supreme Court judge to a  bureaucrat-level post lowers its authority. 
4. Lack of Compliance Powers: CIC cannot enforce its orders or penalize effectively,  diminishing its oversight role. 
5. Pendency of Cases: Over 20,000 appeals pending with CIC indicates weakened capacity  and public trust. 

These concerns directly impact the effectiveness of CIC in ensuring transparency and public  accountability. 

Impact on Institutional Role 

1. Erosion of Public Trust: Perceived loss of independence reduces confidence in the  institution’s impartiality. 
2. Chilling Effect on RTI Usage: Weaker enforcement deters citizens from filing RTIs. 
3. Inconsistent Decision-Making: Loss of status and weakened autonomy may encourage  self-censorship among Commissioners. 
4. Undermines RTI Ecosystem: The weakening of CIC sets a precedent that may dilute state  information commissions too. 

Restoring institutional credibility requires legal safeguards and procedural transparency.

Way Forward 

1. Revisit the RTI Amendments: Reassess the 2019 changes to restore fixed tenure and  parity in status, reinforcing autonomy. 
2. Ensure Transparent Appointments: Establish a time-bound and open process for  selection of Commissioners. 
3. Strengthen CIC’s Powers: Provide legal backing to ensure enforcement of its decisions.
4. Digital and Citizen Engagement: Promote proactive disclosure and reduce reliance on  appeal by improving public access to information. 

Conclusion

As the 2nd ARC observed, strong information commissions are pillars of democratic  accountability. Safeguarding CIC’s autonomy is vital to ensuring transparency, empowering  citizens, and upholding the constitutional promise of participative governance.