×
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

RTI shouldn't be used as surveillance tool: SC

Last Updated 13 November 2019, 15:40 IST

Insisting the need for balance between transparency, judicial independence and the RTI Act, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said the right to information should not be allowed to be used as a "tool of surveillance to scuttle" effective functioning of the judiciary.

The remarks attracted criticism from activists who said such apprehensions appeared not to be borne out from the experiences of implementation of the transparency law in the past 15 years where exemptions provided have ensured that people were not targeted.

Writing a separate judgement while agreeing with the majority to bring the office of Chief Justice of India under RTI Act, Justice N V Ramana said transparency “cannot be allowed to run to its absolute”, as efficiency is an equally important principle to be taken into the fold.

“We may note that right to information should not be allowed to be used as a tool of surveillance to scuttle effective functioning of the judiciary," he said.

Emphasising that the "whole bulwark" of preserving the Constitution is trusted upon judiciary when other branches "have not been able to do so", he said the judicial independence is the basis with which judiciary has "maintained its trust" reposed by the citizens. Such interference requires calibration of the appropriate amount of transparency in consonance with judicial independence, he added.

Js Ramana noted that Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act -- which prohibits disclosure of information which has no public interest or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of and individual -- is to balance privacy with the public interest

He said the right to information and right to privacy are at an "equal footing" and there was "no requirement to take a "priori view" that one right trump other. "Although there are American cases, which have taken the view that the freedom of speech and expression trumps all other rights in every case. However, in India we cannot accord any such priority to the rights," he said.

In a separate judgement, Justice D Y Chandrachud wrote, "judicial independence does not mean the insulation of judges from the rule of law. In a constitutional democracy committed to the rule of law and to the equality of its citizens, it cannot be countenanced that judges are above the law."

Reacting to this observation, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative's (CHRI) Venkatesh Nayak told DH that the purpose of RTI is not to indulge in surveillance and there are enough
exemptions in the Act to scuttle any attempts to invade privacy or any illegal acts.

“Surveillance has to be done under executive instructions and when it is done illegally, it is an affront to the dignity of a citizen. In the past 15 years, thousands of marginalised and disadvantaged people have used this law to claim their rightful entitlements,” he said.

He cited in several instances High Courts, Supreme Court and Central Information Commission have upheld decisions not to disclose details that could invade privacy, including those like disclosing names on interview panels of public service commissions and service matters.

ADVERTISEMENT
(Published 13 November 2019, 15:16 IST)

Follow us on

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT