RTI Act: A Governance Enhancer, Not a Constraint - Why Economic Survey's Re-examination Call is Misplaced

The Economic Survey 2026 has rightly highlighted India's economic resilience in a volatile global landscape, emphasizing the need for innovation, manufacturing growth, and export competitiveness. However, its suggestion to re-examine the Right to Information (RTI) Act, particularly regarding disclosure of policy deliberations, represents a concerning misinterpretation of governance principles.

The Transformative Power of RTI in Indian Governance

Since its enactment, the RTI Act has fundamentally reshaped the relationship between citizens and the state by dramatically reducing information asymmetry. Far from being merely "tools for ideal disclosure" as the Survey describes, RTI provisions have become essential instruments for accountability and transparency in public administration.

The law's most significant contribution has been exposing major governance failures and corruption scandals that might otherwise have remained concealed from public view. Two landmark cases demonstrate this power:

The Vyapam Scam: RTI applications played a crucial role in uncovering the massive Madhya Pradesh professional examination board scandal involving systematic corruption in recruitment processes.
The Adarsh Housing Society Scam: The Act helped reveal how prime Mumbai land meant for war widows was illegally allocated to politicians, bureaucrats, and military officials.

RTI's Role in Financial Governance and Judicial Validation

The Act has proven equally valuable in financial governance, particularly during banking sector crises. Citizens have successfully used RTI to question the Reserve Bank of India about its handling of banking scams, leading to landmark Supreme Court judgments that reinforced transparency obligations.

In the Girish Mittal (2021) and Jayantilal Mistry (2016) cases, the Supreme Court mandated that the RBI must disclose names of willful loan defaulters and details of Non-Performing Assets in public sector banks. These rulings established that financial probity requires transparency, not secrecy, and validated RTI as a mechanism for enforcing such accountability.

Why Policy Deliberation Transparency Matters

The Survey's concern that disclosure of policy deliberations "unduly constrain governance" reflects a narrow understanding of administrative efficiency. In reality, public access to documents that trace policy evolution serves multiple governance-enhancing purposes:

It provides citizens with context for why certain policy choices were made or rejected
It creates institutional memory that improves future policymaking
It enables evidence-based public debate about government decisions
It forces bureaucrats to maintain higher standards of documentation and reasoning

A transparent bureaucracy, far from being an impediment, actually creates the stable, predictable, and fair economic environment that the Survey correctly identifies as essential for growth. When citizens can understand how decisions are made, they develop greater trust in institutions, which in turn facilitates policy implementation.

Recent Challenges to RTI's Effectiveness

Despite its proven value, the RTI framework has faced significant erosion in recent years. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, implemented last year, creates broad exemptions for "personal information" disclosure, potentially limiting access to data with legitimate public interest dimensions.

More troubling are instances where government bodies have reportedly avoided transparency obligations by claiming unavailability of data on critical issues including:

Migrant worker deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic
Paper leaks in competitive examinations
Farmers' suicide statistics

These developments highlight the ongoing tension between transparency advocates and administrative bodies seeking to limit scrutiny.

The Way Forward: Strengthening, Not Weakening, RTI

The Economic Survey itself acknowledges that RTI remains a "powerful tool for reform." This recognition should guide the government's approach. Rather than heeding the suggestion to re-examine the Act's disclosure provisions, policymakers should focus on:

Implementing the Survey's governance-centered ethos through greater transparency
Addressing legitimate concerns about bureaucratic efficiency without compromising accountability
Ensuring that data protection measures don't undermine the public's right to information
Strengthening institutional mechanisms for timely and complete information disclosure

The argumentative democracy fostered by RTI has been instrumental in keeping public officials accountable. As India pursues its ambitious economic goals, this transparency framework will prove increasingly valuable, not as a constraint on governance, but as its essential foundation. The government would do well to recognize this reality and work toward enhancing, rather than diminishing, the Right to Information's role in India's governance architecture.