RTI in Crisis: Citizen Petitions President Mahama to Dissolve Information Commission Board Over “Systemic Failure” : By Stephen Armah Quaye

Modern Ghana: Ghana: Friday, January 9^Th, 2026.
In a democracy built on openness and accountability, silence from institutions mandated to speak for the people can be more dangerous than outright repression. That is the central warning contained in a strongly worded petition submitted to President John Dramani Mahama, calling for the immediate dissolution of the Governing Board of Ghana’s Right to Information Commission (RTIC) over what the petitioner describes as “persistent non-performance, abuse of discretion, and the erosion of constitutional rights.”

The petition, filed by Mr. Theophilus Ken Dorman, on December 4, 2025 and received on behalf of the president by Mrs. Vida Larbi, on January 6, 2026, invokes the 1992 Constitution and the Right to Information Act, 2019 (Act 989), and paints a troubling picture of an institution accused of abandoning its core mandate to protect and enforce the public’s right to access information held by public bodies.
According to the petition, the RTIC has consistently failed to enforce its own lawful orders, despite clear powers granted under Sections 44, 45, 46, and 82 of Act 989. These provisions empower the Commission to compel disclosure, sanction non-compliant institutions, and ensure timely administrative justice. Yet, the petitioner alleges that public institutions routinely defy RTIC directives without consequence, rendering the law “toothless” and public agitation meaningless.
Beyond non-performance, the petition raises constitutional concerns. Under Articles 23 and 296 of the Constitution, administrative bodies are required to act fairly, reasonably, and without arbitrariness. The RTIC’s alleged refusal to act, even when armed with statutory authority, is described as an abuse and misuse of discretionary power a failure that, according to the petition, undermines due process and weakens public faith in administrative justice.
At the heart of the complaint is the constitutional right to information itself. The petitioner argues that the Commission’s inaction has directly enabled the unlawful denial of this right, not only to him but to other citizens seeking transparency. This failure, the petition states, constitutes a fundamental human rights violation and encourages a culture of impunity across public institutions.
The issue, however, goes beyond individual grievances. The petition asserts that the RTIC has suffered a significant loss of public trust and credibility. “A regulatory body that cannot enforce its own orders cannot be trusted to protect public rights,” the petition notes, arguing that the Commission has been reduced to a powerless institution incapable of confronting entrenched secrecy.
Allegations of administrative incompetence also feature prominently. The petitioner cites persistent delays, weak leadership, absence of effective enforcement mechanisms, and a general lack of urgency in resolving complaints. These shortcomings, he argues, amount to gross negligence and justify the dissolution of the current board.
Perhaps most concerning is the accusation that the Commission’s failures are indirectly enabling corruption and secrecy. By allowing public institutions to ignore lawful RTI orders without sanction, the RTIC is said to be facilitating abuse of power and shielding wrongdoing from public scrutiny, the very outcomes the RTI Act was enacted to prevent.
The petition cites specific unresolved cases, including Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative versus the Ghana Police Service, Perfect Vision Initiatives versus the National Signals Bureau, and the Royal Ampong Family versus the Central Regional House of Chiefs, as examples where RTIC orders allegedly remain unenforced.
In his prayer to the President, Mr. Dorman calls for three decisive actions thus, the dissolution of the current RTIC Governing Board, the reconstitution of a new board composed of individuals with proven integrity and commitment to transparency, and an independent administrative review into the Commission’s enforcement failures.

GSIC bars revenue dept clerk from filing more than one RTI plea a year

Times of India: Ahmedabad: Friday, January 9^Th, 2026.
The CGHS case involved discrepancies over a prescribed drug, while the DJB official was fined ₹10,000 for evasive replies and missing statutory timelines.

The Gujarat State Information Commission (GSIC) has barred a senior clerk in the revenue department from filing more than one Right to Information (RTI) application a year after he allegedly submitted 380 applications over three years and approached the Gujarat high court multiple times over the same salary-related dispute.
The commission held that the officer had "repeatedly misused the RTI" by filing "voluminous and repetitive pleas" on identical issues, placing an undue administrative burden on public authorities.
The order was passed by State Chief Information Commissioner Dr Subhash Soni following a hearing held on Dec 19 last month, at the commission's Gandhinagar office. Apart from the RTI applications, the officer also filed multiple first and second appeals on the same subject.
According to the commission, the applications pertained to service-related matters such as pay protection and linking of past services, issues that had already been examined and decided by the finance department on several occasions. Despite receiving detailed replies repeatedly, the officer continued to file fresh applications, the order noted.
"The records show that the complainant filed a total of 46 RTI applications on the same subject and, in addition, more than 380 general applications during the last three years," the order said, adding that such conduct amounted to misuse of the RTI Act.
The commission observed that the large volume of applications filed by a single individual had led to disproportionate use of public authority resources, thereby attracting the provisions of Section 7(9) of the RTI Act.
"Due to a large number of applications filed by a single individual on the same issue, a situation has arisen where public authority resources are being disproportionately utilised," the commission stated. The GSIC also rejected the officer's demand for a refund of Rs 14 paid as copying fees, noting that certified copies of the requested information had already been supplied.
The commission further recorded that the officer had approached the Gujarat high court five times on the same issue but was denied relief in all cases.
Invoking Section 7(9) of the RTI Act, the commission imposed restrictions on future filings. "The complainant is hereby directed not to file more than one application per year under the RTI Act on matters relating to service linkage or pay protection," the GSIC order stated.
Public information officers were directed to strictly implement the decision and reject any application exceeding the permitted limit, while informing the applicant through a simple communication. The commission said the restriction was necessary to prevent abuse of the law and to ensure that genuine RTI applicants are not deprived of timely access to information.

CIC issues show-cause to CGHS official, fines DJB officer over RTI lapses : By Vrinda Tulsian

Hindustan Times: New Delhi: Friday, January 9^Th, 2026.
The CGHS case involved discrepancies over a prescribed drug, while the DJB official was fined ₹10,000 for evasive replies and missing statutory timelines.

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has issued a show-cause notice to a Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) official and imposed a monetary penalty on a Delhi Jal Board (DJB) official in two separate cases linked to the handling of applications under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
In the first matter, information commissioner Jaya Varma Sinha initiated action against a CGHS official after finding inconsistencies in submissions made before the commission regarding supply of a prescribed medicine to a beneficiary. The case arose from an RTI application, filed by a CGHS beneficiary, who claimed that a medicine prescribed by a government doctor reached the CGHS Wellness Centre at Patparganj but was not issued to the patient.
The order said, “It is pertinent to mention that the commission has observed discrepancy in the submissions made by the respondent regarding non-receipt of medicine LAMITOR OD 100 MG.”
The commission recorded that the official attempted to equate a generic medicine with the sustained-release drug prescribed by the specialist. The order said the official was “trying to mislead the bench” by calling both the medicines same.
The commission held that the senior CMO-cum-APIO “not only misled the commission but also vitiated the proceedings of the hearing.”
The order directed the official to show cause as to why “maximum penalty under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act may not be imposed” and why disciplinary action should not be recommended under Section 20(2) of the law.
In addition, the commission directed CGHS authorities to review several RTI queries and provide records after applying the severability clause under Section 10 of the RTI Act, which allows partial disclosure of records after removing exempt portions.
In a separate order, chief information commissioner Raj Kumar Goyal imposed a fine of ₹10,000 on a public information officer of the Delhi Jal Board (DJB) for failing to provide information sought under the RTI Act within the prescribed time.
The commission noted that the RTI application was filed in October 2022, but a response addressing the queries was provided in September 2024. The delay, the commission said, continued until its intervention.
The order observed that “information in the form of a proper reply” was given nearly two years after the application was filed.
“The reason for the delay in providing the information has nowhere been explained,” the commission said.
The RTI application was filed by Vijay Kumar Verma, who had sought details related to water bill payments and raised concerns over the calculation of consumption units and applicable rates.
The commission noted that earlier responses sent to the applicant did not address the queries and were “evasive”.
After examining the record, the commission held that the conduct amounted to a violation of the law governing access to information. It imposed a penalty of ₹10,000 on the official, directing that the amount be paid in two instalments by February 27, 2026.
The two cases, the commission noted, highlighted failures by public authorities to comply with timelines and disclosure obligations under the RTI Act.

File Affidavit Saying Covid Vaccine Funding Data 'Not Available': CIC To DPIIT

ETV Bharat: New Delhi: Thursday, 8^Th January 2026.
The commission said the affidavit was necessary to place the department's claim of non-availability of information on record before disposing of the appeal.

The Central Information Commission has directed the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade to file an affidavit that information about government funding extended to Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers during the pandemic was "not available" with it.
The direction was issued while hearing a Right to Information (RTI) appeal filed by Mahavir Singh Sharma, who had sought details of thousands of crores of rupees released by the Union government to the Serum Institute of India and Bharat Biotech for the production of Covid-19 vaccines in 2020 and 2021. In its reply to the RTI application, DPIIT said the information sought was not held by its logistics division.
"With reference to your RTI application on the subject cited above, the requisite information sought is not available with the logistics division, DPIIT. Therefore, the requisite information may be treated as 'NIL'," the department had stated. The First Appellate Authority later upheld this response.
In its order, Information Commissioner Khushwant Singh Sethi noted that the logistics division had clearly informed the applicant about the non-availability of the information. However, the commission directed the public authority to formally affirm its stand through an affidavit.
"The respondent is directed to file an affidavit to the commission with a categorical statement that the sought information in the RTI application dated October 6, 2023, is not available with their public authority," the CIC said.
While observing that the reply given by DPIIT was appropriate, the commission said the affidavit was necessary to place the department's claim of non-availability of information on record before disposing of the appeal. It directed DPIIT to submit the affidavit within 15 days, both by post and by uploading it on the CIC's compliance portal, with a copy also to be served to the appellant (Sharma).
In his RTI application, Sharma had sought the information, "The amount of Rs 4,500 crore, which was released by the Government of India without bank guarantee to Serum Institute and Bharat Biotech during Covid, has been returned to the Government of India along with interest, or both institutes delivered the vaccine doses in lieu of the amount taken from the government."
He also asked for the information showing that the "Government of India had received all the doses of the vaccines taken from Serum Institute and Bharat Biotech to fight Covid-19 Pandemic," details of vaccines sent abroad "with the permission of the Government of India," and "the complete details of the amount received by both the institutes in exchange for the vaccines from abroad."
The applicant further asked whether "all Indian citizens were administered Covishield and Covaxin vaccines or some Indian citizens were left out," the "total amount spent by the Government of India on the purchase of Covaxin and Covishield," and whether any other Covid-19 vaccines were purchased for Indian citizens.
During the hearing, DPIIT officials maintained that the information was not held by their division and that the RTI application had originally been filed with another department (Department of Biotechnology) before being transferred to them.

हाईकोर्ट ने कहा- RTI में मांगी सूचना सार्वजनिक हित में नहीं, तो निजी मानी जाएगी

ETV Bharat: Allahabad: Thursday, 8^Th January 2026.
इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट ने कहा, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के तहत मांगी गई सूचना यदि सार्वजनिक हित में नहीं है, तो उसे निजी सूचना माना जाएगा.

इलाहाबाद हाई कोर्ट ने कहा है कि सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के तहत मांगी गई सूचना यदि सार्वजनिक हित में नहीं है, तो उसे निजी सूचना माना जाएगा. कोर्ट ने,सुप्रीम कोर्ट के फैसले का हवाला देते हुए कहा कि यदि मांगी गई जानकारी का किसी सार्वजनिक गतिविधि या हित से कोई संबंध नहीं है, तो उसे व्यक्तिगत जानकारी माना जाएगा.
राज्य सूचना आयोग के समक्ष अपील दायर: ऐसे में सूचना के अधिकार अधिनियम के तहत उसके खुलासे पर रोक रहेगी. यह आदेश न्यायमूर्ति अरुण कुमार ने मित्रसेन कुमार सिंह की याचिका पर दिया. मऊ निवासी याची मित्रसेन कुमार सिंह ने आरटीआई के माध्यम से ग्राम पंचायत परसुपुर मुबारकपुर, मऊ के परिवार रजिस्टर में ''प्रदुम्न'' नामक व्यक्ति का नाम दर्ज किए जाने से संबंधित जानकारी मांगी थी. इसके बाद राज्य सूचना आयोग के समक्ष अपील दायर की.
हाईकोर्ट ने सूचना आयोग के फैसले को बरकरार रखा: आयोग ने सुप्रीम कोर्ट के गिरीश राम चंद देश पांडेय मामले का हवाला देते हुए कहा कि मांगी गई जानकारी व्यक्तिगत जानकारी से संबंधित है और 19 सितंबर 2024 के आदेश से अपील खारिज कर दी. याची ने इस आदेश को हाईकोर्ट में चुनौती दी. कोर्ट ने पक्षों को सुनने के बाद राज्य सूचना आयोग के फैसले को बरकरार रखा.
कोर्ट ने कहा कि याची यह साबित करने में विफल रहा कि मांगी गई जानकारी का किसी भी सार्वजनिक गतिविधि या जनहित से क्या संबंध है. हाईकोर्ट ने याचिका को खारिज कर दिया.
(Click here to Download Judgment)

4,000 RTI Complaints Cleared in a Year as Pune Bench Cuts Pending Cases by 37% : Ankur Nikam

The Bridge Chronicle: Pune: Thursday, 8^Th January 2026.
Maharashtra State Information Commission Records Faster Case Disposal in 2025, Ensuring Quicker Justice for Citizens

The Pune bench of the Maharashtra State Information Commission shows a strong improvement in the disposal of cases under the Right to Information (RTI) Act in 2025.
Compared to 2024, the commission handled complaints and second appeals more efficiently, reducing long-standing backlogs and speeding up access to information for citizens across Maharashtra.
In 2024, more than 4,000 RTI complaints were pending with the Pune bench by the end of the year, while only a small number were resolved. This changed sharply in 2025.
During the year, the bench disposed of over 4,000 complaints, bringing the number of pending cases down to 906 by December 2025. This marked a 28% rise in the complaint disposal rate and eased the burden of accumulated cases.
The commission also made steady progress in handling second appeals. While over 10,000 appeals were decided in 2024, nearly 9,000 were resolved in 2025. As a result, the number of pending second appeals dropped from more than 9,000 at the end of 2024 to around 5,800 by December 2025, a reduction of 37%.
Officials noted that the pace of disposal increased notably between August and October 2025, helping the bench gain control over older pending matters. Improved classification of cases, disciplined hearings, and a strict, time-bound schedule played a key role in this progress.
State Information Commissioner Makrand Ranade said the commission’s focus remains on ensuring that citizens receive timely justice under the RTI Act. He added that the Pune bench is committed to maintaining efficiency so that the right to information is upheld without unnecessary delay.

Coimbatore Corporation’s proposal to create pedestrian facilities remains on paper : RTI

The Hindu: Bhubaneswar: Thursday, 8^Th January 2026.
The Coimbatore Corporation’s proposal to create pedestrian facilities across the city has not progressed beyond the planning stage, even as the lack of footpaths and safe crossing points continues to pose challenges on major roads.

The civic body had planned to construct a foot overbridge at
Gandhipuram town bus stand. | Photo Credit: file photo

The scale of the issue is reflected in road safety data. Information obtained from the police under the Right to Information (RTI) Act shows that pedestrians accounted for 37% of road traffic accident fatalities reported in the first 10 months of 2025 in Coimbatore.
Over the past year, the civic body announced a series of measures aimed at improving pedestrian movement. These included proposals to construct three-foot overbridges (FOBs), a street improvement plan to facilitate safer movement for school and college students, and a budget announcement to implement non-motorised transport systems at select locations in the city.
The three FOBs were proposed at the Gandhipuram town bus stand, Ukkadam bus stand, and Lakshmi Junction on Avinashi Road. Each structure was planned under the public-private partnership (PPP) mode at an estimated cost of ₹8 crore.
As part of the Safe Streets for School and College Students initiative, the Corporation proposed student-oriented infrastructure along routes with a high concentration of educational institutions. Trichy Road and Kamarajar Road in Ramanathapuram were identified for the pilot phase. The project, covering a stretch of 2.5 km and estimated to cost ₹2.5 crore, aims to improve walking and cycling facilities and regulate traffic. The area was selected due to the presence of nine educational institutions and the availability of roadside space for redesign.
However, none of these initiatives have been taken up for execution, so far.
District Road Safety Committee member K. Kathirmathiyon said there was no stretch in the city with continuous pedestrian infrastructure. He said crossings on major roads continued to be difficult for those on foot. Opposing the PPP model for FOBs, he said allowing advertisements on such structures went against road safety norms and that notices had been issued to the authorities on the matter. He added that such projects should be fully funded by the government.
Responding to the concerns, Corporation Commissioner M. Sivaguru Prabakaran said proposals for the FOBs had been submitted to the Directorate of Municipal Administration (DMA) and were awaiting approval. He said private players had expressed interest and the projects would be taken up once approvals were received, adding that the PPP model reduced the financial burden on the government.
On the Safe Streets initiative, he said the project was being implemented as a pilot and that the detailed project report was nearing completion. He also said the Corporation was planning to develop continuous footpaths covering about 31 km across the city and that a consultant would be appointed to study the proposal.

Bribery allegations: OIC directs cops to probe RTI applicant

Times of India: Bhubaneswar: Thursday, 8^Th January 2026.
The Odisha Information Commission (OIC) directed police authorities to investigate a habitual RTI applicant facing bribery allegations. The OIC wrote to the Director General of Police, Odisha, seeking an appropriate probe into the matter.

According to the commission, it recently received a complaint along with a video clip in which an RTI applicant, Tankadhar Sahu of Balangir district, was allegedly seen demanding money from a public information officer (PIO) in exchange for withdrawing an RTI-related complaint.
After examining records, the commission found that Sahu filed hundreds of RTI applications against various govt departments, many of which are currently at different stages of hearing before the commission.
The commission said further verification indicated that the applicant frequently stays in Bhubaneswar and allegedly demands bribes from PIOs and first appellate authorities who appear for hearings before the Odisha Information Commission. It was also alleged that he sought adjournments during hearings and later withdrew cases after receiving illegal benefits.
“The matter was placed before the full bench of the commission, which decided to forward the case, along with the video clip and related materials, to police authorities for investigation. The commission also decided to keep all cases filed by the applicant in abeyance until the police investigation is completed,” the commission said.
The commission directed all PIOs and first appellate authorities to identify other instances of alleged misuse of the Right to Information Act, 2005. The commission said it would take strong action against misuse of the RTI Act.

Andhra has enforced a 75% local employment norm for private industries since 2019, RTI reply shows

The South First: Hyderabad: Thursday, 8^Th January 2026.
The Industries Department said that the TDP-led NDA government has not diluted or amended the policy and that it continues to serve as the basis for enforcing local employment norms across industries.

Andhra Pradesh has mandated since October 2019 that private industries operating in the State employ at least 75 percent eligible local candidates, an RTI reply has shown. G.O.Ms. No. 21, issued by the then YSRCP government, continues to be the governing policy and has not been diluted or amended by the present TDP-led NDA government, according to the Industries Department.
Andhra Pradesh has required private industries operating in the State to ensure that 75 percent of their workforce consists of eligible local candidates since October 2019, according to information furnished by the Industries Department under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The RTI application was filed by Kannada activist activist Gautham Ganesh, who sought details on government policies, legal provisions, enforcement mechanisms and incentives aimed at promoting employment for local and Telugu-speaking people in private industries across Andhra Pradesh.
In its reply, the Department said that G.O.Ms. No. 21, issued on 14 October 2019 by the then YSRCP government, remains the principal policy instrument governing local employment in private industries.
Notably, it added that the TDP-led NDA government has not diluted or amended the order and that it continues to serve as the basis for enforcing local employment norms across industries.
The reply does not mention any separate reservation quotas specifically for Telugu-speaking populations, indicating that eligibility is governed by the definition of “local candidate” under the existing rules.
The Department said that a district-level committee headed by the respective District Collector has been constituted to oversee the implementation of the local employment norms.
The committee is tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcing the provisions of G.O.Ms. No. 21, ensuring that private industries adhere to the mandated 75 percent local employment requirement.
While the RTI application included references to employment for Telugu-speaking people, the official response confines itself strictly to “local employment” as defined under the 2019 Government Order.
(Edited by Dese Gowda)

CIC Advocates transparency in sports bodies, 2036 Olympics ambition

NDTV: New Delhi: Wednesday, 7^Th January 2026.
Information related to sports federations and associations recognised by the Union Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports should be proactively disclosed on the ministry's website to ensure transparency and accountability, the CIC has directed.

Information related to sports federations and associations recognised by the Union Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports should be proactively disclosed on the ministry's website to ensure transparency and accountability, the CIC has directed. Underlining the country's aspirations to host the 2036 Summer Olympics, Information Commissioner P R Ramesh said transparent functioning of sports bodies will strengthen India's sporting ecosystem manifold.
The Central Information Commission (CIC) made the observation while hearing a Right to Information (RTI) petition by Sacheen Gandhi seeking details of the recognition status of various sports federations like All India Carrom Federation, Kho-kho Federation of India, Amateur Kabbadi Federation of India, Squash Rackets Federation of India and Softball Association of India.
While holding that the ministry had provided an appropriate reply under the RTI Act, the CIC emphasised that proactive disclosure of such information would reduce citizens' dependence on RTI applications for accessing basic and vital details.
"As India aspires to host the 2036 Summer Olympics, marking a huge step in the country's rise as a sports superpower, the transparent functioning of sports bodies will strengthen India's sporting ecosystem manifold," Ramesh said.
Referring to Section 4 of the RTI Act, the Commission said every public authority must make constant efforts to place maximum information in the public domain through various means, including the internet.
"Voluntary disclosure of all information that ought to be displayed in the public domain should be the rule and members of the public seeking information through RTI application should be an exception," it observed.
The CIC noted that an open government, which is the core objective of the RTI Act, can be realised only when public authorities comply with proactive disclosure norms and update their websites at regular intervals.
Advising the sports ministry to ensure regular updates on recognised sports federations and associations, the Commission said such disclosures would enhance transparency, disseminate correct information and also obviate the need for filing RTI applications on matters of public importance.
The appeal was disposed of with no further action, though the Commission advised the ministry to proactively disclose information related to recognised sports bodies going forward.
(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

‘Habitual RTI applicant took bribes from officials to withdraw applications’: Odisha Information Commission approaches police : Written by Sujit Bisoyi

The Indian Express: Article: Wednesday, 7^Th January 2026.
He has filed hundreds of RTI applications at various departments, which are being adjudicated in different stages, officials said

His method for allegedly extracting money from PIOs included requesting the commission for adjournment of cases during hearings, and after receiving the bribe, he would withdraw the cases, said the official.
An alleged demand for a bribe to withdraw applications filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act has put an activist in the dock, with the Odisha Information Commission asking police to probe the matter.
The commission’s Registrar has written a letter to Odisha’s Director General of Police, asking for an inquiry to be conducted into the alleged bribe demand by “habitual RTI applicant” Tankadhar Sahu, who is based in Balangir.
As per the commission, it received a complaint last week, along with a video clip, wherein Sahu was allegedly seen demanding a bribe from public information officers (PIOs) for withdrawing his RTI applications.
On scrutiny of records, it was seen that Sahu had filed hundreds of RTI applications at various departments, which are being adjudicated in different stages, officials said. He had started camping in Bhubaneswar and regularly demanded bribes from PIOs and first appellate authorities, who visited the Commission’s office for hearings, a senior officer at the Information Commission’s office alleged.
His method for allegedly extracting money from PIOs included requesting the commission for adjournment of cases during hearings, and after receiving the bribe, he would withdraw the cases, said the official.
“The matter was brought before the full Bench of the commission, where it was decided to refer the matter to police authorities along with the video clip as evidence,” read a note by the Registrar.
According to the Registrar, the commission has also decided to keep all of Sahu’s cases pending till the police inquiry is completed. The commission further directed all PIOs and first appellate authorities to keep his cases pending and to identify other such cases where RTI Act provisions were misused.
Police sources said that as directed by the commission, a formal complaint would be lodged soon and a probe would be initiated into the allegations.
Sahu couldn’t be contacted for a comment on the matter.

Punjab RTI activist, journalists move HC for quashing of helicopter use FIR

Times of India: Chandigarh: Tuesday, 6^Th January 2026.
Four individuals, including an RTI activist and journalists, knocked on the doors of the Punjab and Haryana high court, seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against them for allegedly spreading misinformation over the use of the Punjab chief minister's official helicopter.

In their petition before the HC, they challenged FIR No 67 registered at the cybercrime police station, Ludhiana. The FIR invoked Sections 353(1), 353(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), provisions related to public mischief, promotion of disharmony and criminal conspiracy.
According to the petitioners, the FIR stemmed from a social media post by Manik Goyal, a law student and RTI activist, who raised questions about the movement of a helicopter allotted to the CM on Dec 8, when the CM was on a visit to Japan. Goyal relied on publicly accessible flight-tracking data from an app (internet platform) and questioned who used the helicopter during the CM's absence.
The issue gained traction after journalists Baljinder Singh alias Mintu Gurusaria, Maninderjeet Singh, and Mandeep Singh Makkar reported on the matter and discussed the lack of official clarification regarding the helicopter's use. The petitioners maintained that their actions were part of legitimate journalistic inquiry and public-interest reporting.
The FIR was registered on a complaint by police inspector Satbir Singh, and did not cite any private complainant. While the FIR acknowledged the helicopter flew on the stated date and was used by a constitutional functionary, it did not disclose the identity of the person or the purpose of the flights.
In their plea, the petitioners argued that raising questions on the use of public resources and sharing publicly available information was protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which guaranteed freedom of speech and expression. They alleged that the FIR was "mala fide" and intended to intimidate journalists and suppress dissent.
The petition also pointed to earlier RTI applications filed by Goyal in 2024 seeking details of govt expenditure on aircraft, which were denied citing security exemptions. Despite appeals, no information was furnished, prompting the reliance on open-source data, the plea stated. The matter is expected to be taken up before the high court next week. The petitioners also sought a stay on further proceedings during the pendency of the case.

Why is transparency underfunded?

The Island.lk: Sri Lanka: Tuesday, 6^Th January 2026.

The RTI Commission has now confirmed what many suspected although the RTI Act grants it independence to recruit staff, this authority is rendered toothless because the Treasury controls the purse strings. The Commission is left operating with inadequate manpower, limiting its institutional growth even as it struggles to meet rising public demand for information.
This raises an uncomfortable question: if the Treasury can repeatedly allocate billions to loss-making State-Owned Enterprises some of which continue to hemorrhage public funds without reform why is adequate funding for the RTI Commission treated as optional?
Strengthening transparency is not a luxury. It is the foundation of good governance. Every rupee spent on effective oversight helps prevent many more rupees being wasted through inefficiency, misuse, or opaque decision-making.
In such a context, can one really fault those who argue that restricting the Commission’s resources conveniently limits disclosures that may prove politically inconvenient? Whether deliberate or not, the outcome is the same: weaker accountability, reduced public scrutiny, and a system where opacity is easier than openness.
If the government is serious about reform, it must start by funding the institutions that keep it honest. Investing in RTI is not an expense it is a safeguard for the public purse and the public trust.

DPDP Rules: Strengthening Privacy or Enabling Surveillance? - Prabir Purkayastha

News Click: National: Tuesday, 6^Th January 2026.
We might have got rid of the Sanchar Sathi app on our phones, but surveillance by other means will continue under the DPDP Act and its Rules.

After a gap of 2½ years, we now have certain sections of the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, backed by the Rules, ready for immediate implementation. While the State’s powers to surveil citizens come into effect immediately, the sections that protect citizens' privacy against big data companies and the state (or correct/delete incorrect data) have to wait another 18 months. Some data protection indeed!
The long journey that started with the privacy judgement eight years ago the landmark Puttuswamy Judgement has now resulted in codifying via the DPDP Act and now the Rules, not the privacy rights of citizens, but the unfettered rights of the State to monitor the digital footsteps of its citizens.
The digital space is no longer one we access only on our computers. The use of mobile phones, particularly with the rapid decline in their cost, means even those who do not really know about the internet now use it extensively via Google-YouTube (Google), Facebook-Insta-WhatsApp (Meta) for entertainment or to communicate with others.
A survey by the National Statistical Office shows that more than 90% of Indian households have access to smartphones and the internet within the household/home. Therefore, digital privacy is no longer a concern only of a small, middle-class elite but of every user of any digital device mobile or computer that can connect to the internet and, therefore, can be tracked and have its communications monitored.
The primary objective of any Data Protection Act, and therefore of the rules, should be to protect the users’ fundamental rights, which, after the Supreme Court’s Puttuswamy Judgement, also includes the right to privacy. To capture freedom and its limitation pithily: your freedom to swing your fist stops where my nose begins. It is from this simple principle that the concept of a private space has been derived and extended to a wide range of other matters, such as marriage and various personal choices.
The Puttuswamy Judgement further extended the concept of physical space, the basis of privacy, to digital space as well. However, whether in the physical or digital sphere, privacy is not absolute; the State can monitor its citizens, but any such surveillance must be necessary, proportionate, and use the least intrusive option, with strong safeguards.
Once the Puttaswamy Judgement established that privacy, including digital privacy, is a fundamental right, and that any invasion of our digital space can only be done through lawful means. What the DPDP Rules have done is to provide the government with a virtually blank cheque to surveil citizens in the digital space. Under the Rules, it can ask any digital platform, including telecom companies, to provide data on any user.
Akhil Yadav writes in Article 14 that the DPDP Rules create “a new digital regime that hobbles the very rights meant to protect citizens, to the State’s advantage.” Instead of a robust regime protecting citizens' digital rights, we have one that facilitates the State’s monitoring of citizens in digital space.
The second set of rights concerns users' rights against the misuse of their data by the Act's data fiduciaries: telecom companies that provide internet services, as well as multinational platforms like Google and Meta. If the data of these companies is held abroad, they could argue that since their servers are in the US (or Ireland), any such access has to comply with the host country’s laws as well. This is why the government had earlier asked for data localisation, requiring that Indian data be held in India.
However, the Rules notified appear to have left the data localisation issue open, meaning major players, such as Google and Facebook, hold the data of their Indian users abroad in “trusted countries”. If data is held abroad, it becomes more difficult for Indian users to enforce their digital rights against global giants like Google and Meta.
The DPDP Rules also do not protect journalists. In the European Union, the General Data Protection Regulation provides a specific journalistic exception (Article 85) that exempts journalistic activities from specific data protection requirements to safeguard press freedom. The earlier versions (2019 to 2021) of the DPDP Act had this specific exception, which no longer exists in the current version of the Act or the Rules.
The Editors' Guild, in its Statement dated November 19, had stated that in July 2025, the Secretary of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) had held a meeting with press bodies and assured them that such journalistic work would not fall within the purview of the DPDP Act. “However, there has been no official response since then, and the notified Rules do not alleviate these concerns...The Editors Guild urges Meity to urgently issue a clear and categorical clarification exempting bona fide journalistic activity from the consent and processing requirements of the Act. In the absence of such clarity, confusion and over-compliance will weaken press freedom and obstruct the media’s essential role in a democratic society...The Guild reiterates that data protection and privacy are vital objectives, but they must be balanced with the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech and the public’s right to know.”
For journalists, the RTI Act has been a major forensic tool to track corruption. The government has now created a loophole that effectively defangs RTI for journalists or any citizen to trace corruption and misuse of government funds, by creating a privacy exception: any data the government wants to deny can be withheld under this provision.
The last nail in the coffin of citizens’ privacy is what the Rules prescribe for the Privacy Appellate Authority. The Ministry will choose the Appellate Authority and has limited powers, unlike, for example, the TRAI (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India).
As Aakriti Bansal writes in Medianama, “DPDP Act gives the Board adjudicatory powers with narrow boundaries. It can receive complaints, examine breach reports, call for information, issue directions, and impose penalties. It cannot write subordinate legislation, define technical standards, or run public consultations.” Effectively, it is a subordinate body to the Ministry with minimal latitude, with not even its own budget.
We might have got rid of the Sanchar Sathi, the app on our phones that would constantly monitor our activities, but surveillance by other means, though not of the same order, will continue under the DPDP Act and its Rules. The fight for our digital rights is very much a part of our larger struggle for safeguarding our constitutional rights against the authoritarian structure that the Narendra Modi-led Bharatiya Janata Party government wants to create.

RTI Uncovers Rs. 4.76 Crore Govt. Spending on GST Reforms Advertisements Amid Ongoing Compliance Struggles : Saloni Kumari

Study Cafe: National: Tuesday, 6^Th January 2026.
RTI reveals the Government spent Rs. 4.76 crore of taxpayers’ money on advertising GST “reforms” to promote corrections made after years of GST-related problems.

According to the information received under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, the Government of India has spent a total of Rs. 4.76 crore of public money on advertisements (like print media, electronic media, social media, hoardings, and billboards) related to GST reforms, named as “GST Reforms Bachat Utsav.” As per the declaration, this spending has been done to promote amendments and corrections introduced to the nation’s GST system in the time period between September 04, 2025, and October 28, 2025.
The Central Bureau of Communication (CBC), operating under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, had sought information under the RTI Act 2005. The reply of RTI has clarified that the CBC on behalf of the Government of India has spent a total of Rs. 4.76 crore as of now on advertisements in regard to GST reforms (also known as Bachat Utsav) promotion during the said period. The RTI application was submitted on November 20, 2025, and the reply was issued on December 24, 2025.
The serious concern here is that the government has spent this massive amount on advertisements just to highlight “reforms” and “savings” under GST, despite several of these amendments being introduced to resolve issues created by the government’s own flawed GST rollout.
Taxpayers, professionals, and businesses were tackling a convoluted GST system from years of frequent rule changes, technical glitches, and compliance burdens under GST. Instead of admitting these failures and working on improving these bottlenecks, the government chose to spend crores on self-promotion.
Several individuals on social media are criticizing this action of the government and raising the argument that this money belongs to taxpayers and should be utilized in reducing compliance costs, improving GST infrastructure, or compensating small businesses that suffered due to constant changes.
Further arguments have been raised highlighting that the government has spent this large amount on promoting advertisements just to praise their corrections and mistakes made in the past, which appears to be a complete waste of money, especially at a time when many small traders and professionals are still struggling with GST-related issues.
The RTI reply also mentions that if the applicant is dissatisfied with the information provided, they are allowed to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority of the CBC within 30 days of receiving the RTI reply.

Sukhbir slams AAP govt for registering ‘false’ cases against journos, RTI activists

Times of India: Chandigarh: Monday, 5^Th January 2026.
Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) president Sukhbir Singh Badal on Sunday participated in a protest against the registration of alleged false cases implicating journalists and RTI activists.

Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) president Sukhbir Singh Badal

He appealed to the Punjabis to "fight this injustice tooth and nail" and assured that the SAD would extend all the support to "the journalists and RTI activists who were framed in false cases".
Speaking during the protest, where journalists and RTI activists had gathered to condemn the ruling Aam Aadmi Party in Punjab for the registration of a case against RTI activist Manik Goyal and social media influencers for questioning the use of the state helicopter while chief minister Bhagwant Mann was on visit to Japan and Korea, Badal said: "The AAP govt thinks it can browbeat Punjabis with these tactics, but it should know that Punjabis have always stood up to injustice and will rise as one against the AAP govt also."
Emphasising that "the fight has transformed into a people's fight", Badal said: "The journalists and RTI activists who were framed in false cases were highlighting the loot of the resources of Punjab at the hands of Arvind Kejriwal."
He said: "The SAD also filed RTI applications to expose the manner in which the state helicopter was being misused, but the AAP govt consistently denied information on the same."
Alleging that "Arvind Kejriwal is looting Punjab like the East India Company by campaigning across the country at the expense of the Punjab govt", the Akali leader said: "Aeroplanes with 20-seater capacity are booked regularly to ferry Kejriwal to other states. CM Bhagwant Mann is also included in the entourage to ensure the Punjab govt pays the bill."
"Similarly, Punjab govt officials were travelling to Delhi constantly to take commands from Kejriwal, even as AAP workers were posted with ministers at govt expense," he added.
"Against an annual budget of Rs 30-35 crore during the SAD tenure, the AAP govt was spending more than Rs 1,000 crore per year on advertisements and has already spent Rs 4,500 crore under this head till now,", he said, adding "never has so much money been spent for self-publicity in the history of the sate".
Alleging the registration of false cases, including the "one against senior SAD leader Parambans Singh Romana", the senior leader said: "A retired CBI officer was entrusted with the power to direct the registration of these FIRs." He further alleged: "The officer also listed the sections under which the FIRs were to be registered, and any police officer not heeding to these commands was suspended."
Badal said: "The SAD always gave due respect to the media. Former chief minister Parkash Singh Badal always stood for freedom of the press. In stark contrast, the AAP leaders are behaving like thugs by registering cases against anyone who writes against them."

India's transparency body refuses to disclose exporter-wise limestone trade data with Bangladesh

The Business Standard: New Delhi: Monday, 5^Th January 2026.
The CIC noted that disclosure of exporter-specific trade volumes could “provide their competitors with strategic insight into their commercial activities” and thereby harm their competitive position

Tamabil Land Port in Sylhet. Photo: TBS

India's transparency watchdog has upheld a decision not to disclose exporter-wise details of limestone shipments to Bangladesh from the northeastern state of Meghalaya, ruling that the information is protected under the commercial confidence provisions of the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The Central Information Commission (CIC) said there was no overriding public interest in making the data public and that disclosure could potentially harm the competitive position of the exporters concerned.
Meghalaya, a mineral resource-rich state sharing a 443km international border with Bangladesh, regularly exports limestone and boulders to the neighbouring country, making cross-border mineral trade a significant economic activity.
In its order, the CIC said releasing the information would contravene Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, which exempts disclosure of commercial information that could harm the competitive position of third parties.
RTI applicant W Mathew Mawdkhap had sought "the name and address of the exporters who exported limestone to Bangladesh through Bholaganj Land Customs Station in East Khasi Hills, bordering Bangladesh, during the financial year 2023–24" from the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Shillong Customs Division.
The request was denied, citing Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act.
Mawdkhap's first appeal was also dismissed, prompting him to move the Central Information Commission with a second appeal challenging both earlier decisions.
Rejecting the appeal, Information Commissioner Vinod Kumar Tiwari said the information sought related to the names and addresses of exporters and the quantity of limestone exported to Bangladesh during the 2023–24 financial year.
Such exporter-wise trade data, the Commission held, "constitutes commercial information that is ordinarily treated as confidential within commercial and regulatory frameworks".
The CIC noted that disclosure of exporter-specific trade volumes could "provide their competitors with strategic insight into their commercial activities" and thereby harm their competitive position.
The Commission further observed that regulatory authorities receive commercial information from private entities in a fiduciary capacity as part of statutory compliance. "Releasing such information indiscriminately in the public domain would undermine the trust and confidentiality expected in such interactions," it said.
During the hearing, the appellant did not appear before the Commission and failed to place any material on record to establish an overriding public interest, Tiwari noted.
"In the absence of any such justification, the Commission finds no reason to disturb the concurrent findings of the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) and the First Appellate Authority (FAA)," the order said.
The customs department had argued that exporter-wise limestone export data to Bangladesh is not meant for public dissemination unless required by law or disclosed with the consent of the concerned third parties.
Finding no infirmity in the denial of information, the CIC ruled that the exemption invoked was "legally sustainable" and dismissed the appeal.

Welfare state | India's road to rights : Published By: Yashwardhan Singh

India Today: 50th-anniversary-special: Sunday, 4^Th January 2026.
In this decade, India transformed welfare into legal entitlements through RTI, MGNREGA, Aadhaar and food security, expanding citizenship rights but failing to dismantle caste and minority disadvantage

JOB GUARANTEE: Road construction project workers
under MGNREGA in Bastar district, Chhattisgarh, Nov. 2012
 (Photo: Suvashis Mullick)

The decade stands out as one of the most ambitious phases of socio-economic lawmaking since Independence. It was an era when the Indian State sought to redefine its relationship with citizens by moving decisively from welfare as discretion to welfare as entitlement. These laws did not merely redistribute resources. They reshaped expectations, redefined rights and altered the grammar of governance itself.
The turning point came in 2005 with the Right to Information (RTI) Act. For the first time, access to government records was no longer a privilege mediated by power, but a statutory right vested in the citizen. RTI cracked open the opaque architecture of the Indian State and forced officials, politicians and institutions into an unprecedented culture of explanation. It also became the backbone of civil society activism and investigative journalism, exposing corruption and inefficiency across sectors. RTI did not clean up the system, but it fundamentally altered the balance of power between the State and the citizen.

CITIZEN WATCH: Social activist Aruna Roy demanding
public audit and transparency in MGNREGA works in
Jaipur, Dec. 2009 (Photo: Purushottam Diwakar)

In the same year, Parliament enacted the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act. By making employment a legal right for rural households, the law attempted to provide income security at the bottom of the pyramid while creating durable rural assets. While plagued by leakages and uneven implementation, MGNREGA changed rural labour markets, raised wage floors and gave political voice to the poor.
The next major leap came with Aadhaar, launched in 2009. Conceived as a biometric identity platform, it sought to solve a persistent problem of Indian governance: the inability of the State to accurately identify beneficiaries. By assigning a unique identity linked to fingerprints and iris scans, Aadhaar promised to eliminate ghost beneficiaries and enable direct benefit transfers. Over time, Aadhaar became the backbone of India’s digital welfare architecture, enabling subsidy reform, financial inclusion, and portability of benefits. At the same time, it raised profound questions about privacy, surveillance and State power that continue to animate constitutional debate.
The rights-based framework reached its most expansive expression with the National Food Security Act of 2013. By legally entitling nearly two-thirds of India’s population to subsidised food grains, the state assumed responsibility for protecting citizens against hunger at a scale never attempted before. Critics questioned its fiscal sustainability and efficiency, but its political logic was unmistakable.
Yet, beneath this architecture of empowerment, older social fractures remained stubbornly intact. Caste hierarchies and minority deprivation continued to shape lived realities. The mid-2000s saw intense agitation over the extension of OBC reservations to higher education. The expansion of quotas produced new anxieties, new agitations and new fault lines without resolving the core problem of unequal access to quality education and employment. Similarly, due to the stark educational divide between Muslims and non-Muslims, a large section of Muslim youth risked being excluded from the educated workforce, with potentially explosive social consequences.
The paradox of the decade is therefore stark. Welfare laws expanded access, but they did not dismantle structural disadvantage rooted in history, discrimination and geography.