SC Seeks Centre's Reply on RTI Changes Under Data Protection Law

The Supreme Court on Friday sought the Centre's response to a batch of petitions challenging amendments to the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 introduced through the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, in a case that could redefine the balance between citizens' right to information and the fundamental right to privacy.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana heard submissions from senior advocate Vrinda Grover and advocate Prashant Bhushan before directing Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, to file the government's response.

The petitions challenge the amendment to Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, which governs exemptions from disclosing personal information. Petitioners argue that the revised provision removes the long-standing "larger public interest" safeguard that previously allowed disclosure of personal information when it served transparency, accountability or public interest.

Enacted in 2005, the RTI Act is widely regarded as one of India's most effective transparency laws, enabling citizens to access information from public authorities and strengthening democratic accountability. Before the amendment, authorities could deny personal information only if its disclosure amounted to an unwarranted invasion of privacy, unless it related to a public activity or a larger public interest justified disclosure. Critics say the DPDP Act has replaced this balanced approach with broader protection for personal information, potentially limiting public access to information.

According to the petitions, the change could make it more difficult to obtain information relating to public officials, recruitment processes, asset declarations, conflicts of interest and corruption investigations, thereby weakening social audits and anti-corruption efforts. During the hearing, Prashant Bhushan argued that authorities could now reject requests involving public officials simply by classifying the information as personal.

The case also brings into focus the constitutional relationship between Article 19(1)(a), under which the right to information has evolved through judicial interpretation, and Article 21, under which the Supreme Court's landmark Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (2017) judgment recognised privacy as a fundamental right. While the DPDP Act, 2023 was enacted to safeguard digital personal data, the petitioners contend that its amendments dilute the RTI framework instead of maintaining a balance between privacy and transparency.