New Delhi, April 8 The Central Information Commission (CIC) has expressed concern that "some public authorities continue to deny information without adequate reasons," and asserted that merely citing exemption clauses in the RTI Act is insufficient.
The CIC emphasized that exemptions should not be interpreted in a way that would "undermine the right itself."
Highlighting the importance of reasoned decision-making, the CIC, which serves as the highest adjudicating body for RTI-related complaints and appeals under the transparency law, stated that it is the responsibility of public authorities to justify any denial of information, and that merely citing exemption clauses is insufficient.
These observations were made while deciding an appeal against the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), where an applicant sought a copy of his own affidavit recorded during an inquiry into a corporate entity.
The request was denied by the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. However, the CIC found that the denial was issued "without any justification" and noted that no explanation was provided indicating how disclosure would hinder the investigation.
Information Commissioner P R Ramesh reiterated that "the responsibility lies with the public authority to demonstrate how the disclosure of such information would impede the investigation," warning against the routine use of exemption clauses.
The CIC also underscored that merely reproducing statutory language is insufficient, pointing out that "merely reproducing the wording of the statute would not be sufficient" to deny information under the RTI Act.
Reinforcing the principle that transparency is the norm, the commission cited judicial precedents to stress that "access to information, under Section 3 of the Act, is the rule and exemptions under Section 8, the exception," adding that restrictions must be narrowly construed so as not to "undermine the right itself."
The CIC noted the public authority's conduct, mentioning that the official "chose neither to attend the hearing nor to submit any substantial arguments in support of the denial of information."
On the merits of the case, the CIC observed that the information sought was personal to the applicant and held that it was "highly unlikely that it would impede any investigation or enquiry if the information is disclosed to him."
Accordingly, the CIC directed the public authority to provide the requested information within four weeks, reiterating that the denial of RTI requests must be justified with a clear and reasoned explanation in accordance with the law.