30 Jan 2026·Source: The Indian Express

3 min

Polity & GovernanceNEWS

Economic Survey 2025-26 Advocates Re-evaluation of the Right to Information Act

Economic Survey urges revisiting RTI Act for efficient governance and transparency.

Photo by Thorium

The Economic Survey 2025-26 has called for a re-examination of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, suggesting that while the Act has significantly contributed to transparency and accountability, there is a need to balance its use with the efficiency of governance. The survey indicates that some provisions of the Act may be hindering the decision-making process and causing unnecessary administrative burden. It proposes a review to ensure that the RTI Act continues to serve its intended purpose without impeding effective governance. The recommendations are part of a broader effort to streamline government processes and enhance overall efficiency.

Key Facts

Economic Survey 2025-26: Advocates RTI Act re-examination

RTI Act: Aimed at transparency and accountability

Survey Suggestion: Balance RTI use with governance efficiency

UPSC Exam Angles

GS Paper II: Polity and Governance - Transparency and Accountability

Connects to fundamental rights, constitutional provisions, and legal frameworks

Potential question types: Statement-based, analytical, and critical evaluation

Visual Insights

Evolution of the Right to Information Act

This timeline shows the key events leading to the current debate on re-evaluating the RTI Act.

The RTI Act has evolved over time, facing challenges related to implementation and its impact on governance.

2005Right to Information Act enacted in India
2010Increased RTI applications lead to administrative challenges
2015Debates on protecting whistleblowers under RTI
2019Supreme Court judgments clarify RTI scope and limitations
2022Increased focus on online RTI filing and processing
2025Concerns raised about RTI hindering decision-making efficiency
2026Economic Survey 2025-26 advocates re-evaluation of the RTI Act

More Information

Background

The Right to Information (RTI) movement in India gained momentum in the late 1980s and early 1990s, driven by grassroots activists demanding access to government information to combat corruption and ensure accountability. Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) played a pivotal role, advocating for transparency in public works and government expenditures in Rajasthan. Before the RTI Act, access to information was limited and governed by the Official Secrets Act of 1923, which heavily restricted the disclosure of government documents.

The initial efforts focused on demanding information related to local development projects, leading to public hearings and social audits that exposed widespread corruption. The struggle culminated in the enactment of the RTI Act in 2005, marking a significant shift towards a more open and accountable governance system.

Latest Developments

In recent years, there have been increasing concerns about the effectiveness and potential misuse of the RTI Act. The number of RTI requests has surged, placing a significant burden on public authorities. There have been debates about the types of information that should be disclosed, particularly concerning sensitive personal data and information that could affect national security or economic interests.

Several committees and commissions have examined the RTI Act, recommending measures to streamline the process, reduce frivolous requests, and protect the privacy of individuals. The government has also been exploring ways to leverage technology to improve the efficiency of RTI implementation, such as online portals for filing and tracking requests. The focus is on striking a balance between transparency and the need to protect legitimate government interests and ensure efficient governance.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why is the Right to Information (RTI) Act being re-evaluated according to the Economic Survey 2025-26?

The Economic Survey 2025-26 suggests a re-evaluation of the RTI Act to balance its use in promoting transparency and accountability with the need for efficient governance. The survey indicates that certain provisions might be hindering the decision-making process and creating unnecessary administrative burden.

2. What is the main aim of the Right to Information (RTI) Act?

The RTI Act aims to promote transparency and accountability in the functioning of the government by empowering citizens to access information held by public authorities.

3. What are the potential drawbacks of the RTI Act, as highlighted by the Economic Survey?

According to the Economic Survey 2025-26, potential drawbacks include hindering the decision-making process and causing unnecessary administrative burden due to the surge in RTI requests.

4. How might the re-evaluation of the RTI Act impact common citizens?

The re-evaluation could lead to changes in the types of information accessible or the process for obtaining it. The goal is to make the process more efficient while still upholding the principles of transparency and accountability, but changes could affect the ease with which citizens can access government information.

5. What is the historical background of the RTI movement in India?

The RTI movement gained momentum in the late 1980s and early 1990s, driven by grassroots activists demanding access to government information to combat corruption and ensure accountability. Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) played a pivotal role.

6. What are the key facts about the Economic Survey's recommendation regarding the RTI Act for UPSC Prelims?

For UPSC Prelims, remember that the Economic Survey 2025-26 advocates for a re-examination of the RTI Act to balance transparency with governance efficiency. The survey suggests that some provisions may be causing administrative burden.

7. What aspects of the RTI Act are currently under debate?

Debates surround the types of information that should be disclosed, particularly concerning sensitive personal data and information that could affect national security or economic interests. There are also concerns about the increasing number of RTI requests and the burden on public authorities.

8. What are the pros and cons of re-evaluating the RTI Act?

Pros include streamlining government processes and enhancing efficiency. Cons include potentially reducing transparency and limiting citizens' access to information if the changes are not carefully considered.

9. What is the constitutional basis of the Right to Information in India?

While the RTI Act itself is a statutory law, the right to information is considered an intrinsic part of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression. Access to information enables citizens to form informed opinions and participate effectively in a democracy.

10. What reforms might be needed to balance transparency and governance efficiency in the context of the RTI Act?

Reforms might include clarifying the types of information that can be exempted from disclosure, streamlining the RTI application process, and strengthening the capacity of public authorities to respond to requests efficiently. Also, promoting proactive disclosure of information can reduce the need for individual RTI requests.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Consider the following statements regarding the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005: 1. The Act mandates suo moto disclosure of information by public authorities. 2. The Act applies to all constitutional authorities, including the judiciary. 3. Information relating to national security is absolutely exempt from disclosure under the Act. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A.1 only
B.2 only
C.1 and 2 only
D.1, 2 and 3

Show Answer

Answer: A

Statement 1 is CORRECT: Section 4 of the RTI Act mandates suo moto (proactive) disclosure of information by public authorities to reduce the need for citizens to file RTI requests. Statement 2 is INCORRECT: While the RTI Act applies to constitutional authorities, its applicability to the judiciary has been a subject of debate and interpretation. The Supreme Court has held that its administrative side is covered, but judicial functions are generally exempt. Statement 3 is INCORRECT: Information relating to national security is NOT absolutely exempt. Section 8(1)(a) allows for exemptions, but if the public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to protected interests, the information may be disclosed.

2. Which of the following statements accurately reflects a concern raised regarding the Right to Information (RTI) Act's impact on governance?

A.The RTI Act has led to a significant decrease in corruption cases reported across government departments.
B.The RTI Act has streamlined the decision-making process, resulting in faster policy implementation.
C.The RTI Act has created an administrative burden due to the high volume of requests, potentially hindering efficient governance.
D.The RTI Act has ensured complete transparency in all government operations, leaving no room for confidentiality.

Show Answer

Answer: C

Option C is the most accurate. While the RTI Act promotes transparency, the high volume of requests can create an administrative burden, diverting resources and potentially slowing down decision-making processes. Options A, B, and D are generally not accurate reflections of the concerns associated with the RTI Act's impact.

3. Consider the following statements: 1. The Central Information Commission (CIC) is a statutory body established under the Right to Information Act, 2005. 2. The Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners are appointed by the President of India on the recommendation of a committee chaired by the Prime Minister. 3. The CIC has the power to impose penalties on public information officers for failing to provide information without reasonable cause. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A.1 and 2 only
B.2 and 3 only
C.1 and 3 only
D.1, 2 and 3

Show Answer

Answer: D

All three statements are correct. Statement 1: The CIC is indeed a statutory body established under the RTI Act, 2005. Statement 2: The President appoints the CIC and Information Commissioners based on the recommendation of a committee chaired by the Prime Minister, with the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister as members. Statement 3: The CIC has the power to impose penalties under Section 20 of the RTI Act on Public Information Officers (PIOs) who fail to provide information without reasonable cause.