Economic Survey calls for re-examination of RTI Act.

Indian Express: Nikhil Ghanekar: New Delhi: Friday, January 30, 2026.

While acknowledging the sunshine law as a powerful democratic reform and a tool for accountability and against corruption, it said that the legislation carries risks of becoming an “end in itself”, where disclosures are celebrated regardless of contribution to better governance.

The Economic Survey 2025-26 tabled in Parliament Thursday has called for a re-examination of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, and suggested exploring ‘adjustments’ to exempt disclosures on deliberative process of policy making and possibly have a ministerial veto with parliamentary oversight to guard against disclosures that could ‘unduly constrain governance’.

While acknowledging the sunshine law as a powerful democratic reform and a tool for accountability and against corruption, it said that the legislation carries risks of becoming an “end in itself”, where disclosures are celebrated regardless of contribution to better governance. It said that the Act was never intended “as a tool for idle curiosity”, nor as a mechanism to micromanage government from the outside.

Among the suggestions it made to revisit the Act included, exempting brainstorming notes, working papers, and draft comments until they form part of the final record of decision-making, protection of service records, transfers, and confidential staff reports. Crucially, it suggested exploring a “narrowly defined” ministerial veto, subject to parliamentary oversight to guard against disclosures that could “unduly constrain governance”.

The survey sought to draw parallels between the RTI Act and similar laws in the US, UK and Sweden and argued that unlike the RTI Act, internationally, internal personnel rules, inter-agency memos, and financial regulations are exempt from disclosures. It said that in contrast, the Indian law leaves “far less space” for such carve-outs, where in draft notes, internal correspondence, and personal records officials often enter public domain, with weak public interest links. It noted that unlike the US, UK or South Africa, which shield policy deliberations and draft documents, India has no general “deliberative process” exemption. “File notings, internal opinions, and draft notes fall squarely within the Act’s definition of information, with only Cabinet papers protected temporarily until a decision is made.”

Elaborating its argument, the survey sought to flag concerns that if every draft or remark is disclosed, officials may “hold back”, resorting instead to cautious language and fewer “bold ideas.” Making it clear that it was not seeking secrecy by default, the survey stated “democracy best functions when officials can deliberate freely and are then held accountable for the decisions they endorse, not for every half-formed thought expressed along the way”.