15 Feb 2026·Source: The Hindu

4 min

Polity & GovernanceSocial IssuesNEWS

Supreme Court to Review Data Law's Impact on Right to Information

SC to examine if data protection law weakens citizens' access to information.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a petition accusing India’s new digital personal data protection law of weaponizing the right to privacy to disarm the citizens’ right to seek information from the state under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The petition, led by human rights and transparency activist Venkatesh Nayak, challenges Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act of 2023, arguing that it amends Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act to allow public authorities to refuse information on the ground that the details sought are of a “personal” nature. The petition argues that this provision turns the fundamental right to privacy on its head, extending it to protect the state and public functionaries from RTI disclosures.

Key Facts

The Supreme Court will hear a petition challenging Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act of 2023.

The petition argues that Section 44(3) amends Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.

The amendment allows public authorities to refuse information by claiming it is of a “personal” nature.

The petition claims this weaponizes the right to privacy to disarm the citizens’ right to seek information.

UPSC Exam Angles

GS Paper II: Polity and Governance - Transparency and Accountability

Linkage to Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles

Potential for questions on legislative intent and judicial interpretation

In Simple Words

The government made a new rule about how companies can use your personal data. Now, some people are worried this new rule could make it harder to get information from the government using the Right to Information (RTI) Act. They think the government might hide information by saying it's 'personal'.

India Angle

Imagine you want to know how much money your local government spent on a new road. The RTI Act lets you ask for this information. But, if officials say the spending details are 'personal,' they might not give you the information, affecting transparency.

For Instance

Think about when you apply for a government job. You have a right to know why you weren't selected. If the selection process is hidden under the guise of 'personal data,' it becomes harder to ensure fairness and accountability.

This affects everyone because it's about knowing what the government is doing. If information is hidden, it's harder to hold them accountable and ensure they're working for the people.

Transparency is key: Don't let 'privacy' become a shield for government secrecy.

Visual Insights

DPDP Act and RTI Act Conflict

Visualizes the conflict between the Digital Personal Data Protection Act and the Right to Information Act, focusing on the impact on citizens' right to information.

DPDP Act vs RTI Act

●Right to Privacy
●Right to Information
●Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act
●Judicial Review

More Information

Background

The Right to Information (RTI) Act of 2005 is a landmark legislation that empowers citizens to seek information from public authorities. It stems from the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, recognizing that access to information is crucial for informed citizenry and good governance. The RTI Act is not absolute and contains exemptions under Section 8. These exemptions balance the need for transparency with concerns like national security, privacy, and commercial confidentiality. The interpretation and application of these exemptions have been subject to judicial scrutiny and amendments over time. The Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act of 2023 aims to protect the privacy of individuals by regulating the processing of their personal data. It establishes a framework for data collection, storage, and usage, with provisions for consent, data minimization, and accountability. The interplay between the DPDP Act and the RTI Act raises questions about the scope of privacy exemptions and their potential impact on transparency.

Latest Developments

The Supreme Court's review of the DPDP Act's impact on the RTI Act highlights the ongoing tension between the right to privacy and the right to information. Activists argue that Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act could be used to shield public authorities from scrutiny, undermining the effectiveness of the RTI Act. Stakeholders have expressed concerns about the potential for misuse of the privacy exemption to deny access to information of public interest. The judiciary's interpretation of these provisions will be crucial in determining the balance between transparency and privacy in the digital age. The outcome of this review could significantly impact the future of the RTI regime in India. Looking ahead, the implementation of the DPDP Act and its interaction with other laws, including the RTI Act, will require careful monitoring. There is a need for clear guidelines and judicial pronouncements to ensure that the right to information is not unduly restricted in the name of privacy. The government may need to consider amendments or clarifications to address any ambiguities and prevent potential misuse of the law.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the core issue being reviewed by the Supreme Court regarding the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act?

The Supreme Court is reviewing whether the DPDP Act weakens the Right to Information (RTI) Act, specifically if Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act allows public authorities to deny information by claiming it's 'personal'.

2. Explain how Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act is alleged to impact Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.

Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act amends Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. This amendment allows public authorities to refuse information if it's considered 'personal,' potentially hindering citizens' access to information under the RTI Act.

3. What is the Right to Information (RTI) Act of 2005, and why is it important for citizens?

The Right to Information (RTI) Act of 2005 empowers citizens to seek information from public authorities, promoting transparency and accountability in governance. It stems from the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression.

4. For UPSC Prelims, what is the key provision of the Constitution related to the Right to Information?

The Right to Information stems from the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

5. What arguments are being made against Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act?

The primary argument is that it weaponizes the right to privacy, allowing public authorities to deny access to information under the RTI Act by claiming it is of a 'personal' nature, thus shielding themselves from scrutiny.

6. Why is the Supreme Court reviewing the DPDP Act's impact on the RTI Act?

The Supreme Court is reviewing the DPDP Act to assess whether it unduly restricts citizens' right to information, potentially undermining the effectiveness of the RTI Act and impacting transparency in governance.

7. In the context of the DPDP Act and RTI Act, how does the right to privacy potentially conflict with the right to information?

The right to privacy, as interpreted through the DPDP Act, can be used to deny access to information held by public authorities if it is deemed 'personal'. This conflicts with the RTI Act's aim to ensure transparency by providing citizens access to government-held information.

8. What are the potential consequences if Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act is broadly interpreted?

A broad interpretation could lead to increased opacity in governance, reduced accountability of public officials, and a significant weakening of the RTI Act, making it harder for citizens to access crucial information.

9. Who is Venkatesh Nayak, and what is his role in the current debate surrounding the DPDP Act and RTI Act?

Venkatesh Nayak is a human rights and transparency activist who has filed the petition challenging Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act, arguing that it undermines the RTI Act.

10. What is the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act of 2023, and when was the Right to Information (RTI) Act enacted?

The Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act was enacted in 2023. The Right to Information (RTI) Act was enacted in 2005.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Consider the following statements regarding the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005: 1. The RTI Act is derived from the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. 2. Section 8 of the RTI Act provides for exemptions from disclosure of information. 3. The Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, has no impact on the interpretation of Section 8 of the RTI Act. 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: A

Statement 1 is CORRECT: The RTI Act is indeed rooted in Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, recognizing access to information as essential for exercising freedom of speech and expression. Statement 2 is CORRECT: Section 8 of the RTI Act outlines exemptions where information can be withheld, balancing transparency with other interests like national security and privacy. Statement 3 is INCORRECT: The DPDP Act, 2023, specifically Section 44(3), directly impacts the interpretation of Section 8 of the RTI Act, particularly concerning the disclosure of personal information. The Supreme Court is reviewing this impact.

2. In the context of the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, which of the following statements is most accurate regarding its interaction with the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005?

A.The DPDP Act completely overrides the RTI Act, preventing the disclosure of any personal data.
B.The DPDP Act amends Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, potentially broadening the scope for denying information on the grounds of personal privacy.
C.The DPDP Act has no impact on the RTI Act, as the latter deals with access to information while the former deals with data protection.
D.The DPDP Act expands the scope of the RTI Act by mandating the disclosure of all personal data held by public authorities.

Show Answer

Answer: B

Option B is the most accurate. The DPDP Act, specifically Section 44(3), amends Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. This amendment allows public authorities to refuse information if it is deemed to be of a “personal” nature, potentially expanding the grounds for denying information under the RTI Act. The Supreme Court is currently reviewing this aspect.

3. Assertion (A): Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, is being challenged for potentially undermining the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Reason (R): The provision allows public authorities to deny information citing privacy concerns, which could shield them from public scrutiny. In the context of the above statements, which of the following is correct?

A.Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.
B.Both A and R are true, but R is NOT the correct explanation of A.
C.A is true, but R is false.
D.A is false, but R is true.

Show Answer

Answer: A

Both the assertion and the reason are true, and the reason correctly explains the assertion. Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act is indeed being challenged for its potential to weaken the RTI Act. The reason accurately explains why: it allows public authorities to deny information based on privacy concerns, which could shield them from public scrutiny and accountability.