Objectives & Salient Features of RTI Act 2005

Landmark Case: Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India (2019) 10 SCC 1 — The Supreme Court held that vacancies in Information Commissions must be filled in a time-bound, transparent manner because an under-staffed Commission denies citizens their fundamental right to information, confirming the Act’s enforcement architecture as constitutionally essential.

Why the RTI Act 2005 Was Needed

Before 2005, India had the Freedom of Information Act 2002 — a law that was passed by Parliament but never brought into force. It had no independent appellate body, no penalty provisions, and no mandatory proactive disclosure. The RTI Act 2005 replaced it with a law that has real teeth: time-bound responses, independent commissions, financial penalties, and a statutory obligation to publish information before anyone even asks.

The Act came into full operation on 12 October 2005, after Presidential assent on 15 June 2005.

Objectives of the RTI Act

The Preamble declares five clear objectives:

1. Transparency — Make the working of government visible to citizens.
2. Accountability — Make officials answerable for their decisions and actions.
3. Containment of Corruption — When officials know their work can be scrutinised, misuse reduces.
4. Informed Citizenry — Citizens can participate in democracy only with information.
5. Practical Working System — Not a paper right but a usable, enforceable mechanism.

The Four Pillars of the Preamble

graph TD
    A["RTI ACT 2005\nPREAMBLE"] --> B["Pillar 1\nPractical Regime\nWorking system\nfor citizens to get info"]
    A --> C["Pillar 2\nPromote Transparency\nCitizens can see\ngovernment work"]
    A --> D["Pillar 3\nPromote Accountability\nOfficials must answer\nfor their actions"]
    A --> E["Pillar 4\nContain Corruption\nSunlight reduces\nmisuse of power"]
    B --> F["Informed Citizenry\nStrong Democracy"]
    C --> F
    D --> F
    E --> F

10 Salient Features of the RTI Act 2005

RTI Act 2005 vs Freedom of Information Act 2002

Sample Problem (KSLU-style)

Problem: Critically examine the salient features of the Right to Information Act 2005 and explain how it is superior to the Freedom of Information Act 2002.

Answer (IRAC):

• Issue: What are the defining features of the RTI Act 2005 and in what ways does it improve upon the FOI Act 2002?
• Rule: The RTI Act 2005 is governed by its Preamble, and its key operational provisions include Sections 2(f), 2(h), 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 15, 19, 20, and 22. The FOI Act 2002 was passed but never enforced.
• Analysis: The FOI Act 2002 failed on three counts: no independent appellate body, no penalties for violation, and no proactive disclosure mandate. The RTI Act 2005 addresses all three. Section 4 requires government to publish information on its own, reducing the burden on citizens to file applications. Sections 12 and 15 create independent Commissions at the Centre and in each State, removing appeals from the control of the same government that denied the information. Section 20 imposes personal financial liability on the defaulting PIO — making the right enforceable at the individual level.
• Conclusion: The RTI Act 2005 is not just an improvement on the FOI Act 2002 — it represents a fundamentally different approach: proactive disclosure as the default, independent adjudication, and personal accountability for officers. It is one of the strongest transparency laws in the world.