“In response to Ashwini Vaishnaw’s defense, Jairam Ramesh criticized the RTI-Destroying Amendment to DPDP Act, arguing it would compromise transparency and accountability.”
Once more, Ramesh has requested that the minister “pause, review, and repeal” the RTI Act modification.
New Delhi: Congress MP Jairam Ramesh called Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, which amends the Right to Information (RTI) Act, a “RTI-destroying amendment” and asked for its “pause, review, and repeal” in a letter to Union Minister for Electronics and Information Technology Ashwini Vaishnaw.
After Vaishnaw replied to the Congress MP’s previous letter to him on March 23, Ramesh wrote him a letter on Sunday, April 13.
In his letter, Vaishnaw cited Section 3 of the DPDP Act and said personal details that are subject to public disclosure under various laws will continue to be disclosed. He added that the amendment does not restrict the disclosure of personal information but aims to strengthen privacy rights. Jairam Ramesh has countered these claims, arguing that the amendment could undermine transparency and public access to critical data.
The Wire has reported that the minister’s response skipped the key issue of the amendment to the RTI Act, which now provides a blanket exemption to the disclosure of personal information. This change has been decried by transparency and anti-corruption activists, with Jairam Ramesh leading the charge in criticizing the amendment for undermining the Right to Information Act and compromising accountability.
In his response, Ramesh stated that Vaishnaw’s reference to Section 3 of the DPDP Act “is wholly irrelevant since Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 itself has been drastically amended.”
“According to the amended RTI Act, which excludes all personal information from being accessible, Section 3 of the DPDP Act will now only protect disclosures,” he wrote.
“Second, the operation of the RTI Act, 2005 – informed by several judgments by the Supreme Court and various high courts – has demonstrated that the law is able to withhold the disclosure of personal information which has no relationship to any public activity or public interest,” his letter said. Jairam Ramesh has pointed out that this amendment undermines the very principles of transparency that the RTI Act was designed to uphold.
Jairam Ramesh Slams 1 Unjust Change to RTI Act That Undermines Citizen Rights
“Third, the deletion of the proviso in Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, which recognizes the citizens’ right to information as being at par with that of legislators, is completely unwarranted,” the Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh said in his letter to Vaishnaw. Jairam Ramesh emphasized that this change undermines citizens’ fundamental right to access information and weakens the RTI Act.
“In fact,” he added, “that proviso is applicable not just to the personal information exemption, but all exemptions in Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, 2005,” Jairam Ramesh emphasized in his statement.
Ramesh’s letter comes as opposition MPs of the INDIA bloc on Thursday (April 10) held a press conference seeking a repeal of Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act, and said that the provision has a “draconian impact” on the rights of citizens and the freedom of the press by destroying the RTI Act.
In response to Ramesh’s letter from March 23, Vaishnaw stated that the RTI Act modification “will not restrict disclosure of personal information” the same day.
Therefore, the RTI Act will continue to disclose any personal information that is required to be disclosed by law under the laws controlling our public representatives and welfare programs, among other things. As stated in his letter, Vaishnaw stated, “This amendment will not limit the disclosure of personal information; rather, it aims to strengthen the privacy rights of individuals and prevent the potential misuse of the law.”
Transparency activist Venkatesh Nayak had said to The Wire that the minister’s reading of Section 3 as a standalone clause is not correct and must be read in conjunction with the amendment made through Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act, which turns Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act into a category exemption. Jairam Ramesh has echoed similar concerns, stressing that the changes introduced by the amendment could severely limit the transparency promised by the RTI Act.
In his letter on Sunday, Ramesh also cited the minister’s reference to the Puttaswamy ruling of the Supreme Court, which upheld privacy as a basic right. He said that the ruling made no mention of the necessity to change the RTI Act.
Please keep in mind that this ruling makes no reference of the necessity of amending the RTI Act of 2005. The ruling reaffirms that protecting individual privacy and advancing institutional transparency are not antagonistic but rather complementary, he stated.
Similar to his letter on March 23, Ramesh once more requested that the minister “pause, review, and repeal” the RTI Act amendment.
