Political Science, asked by RiazSheikh, 1 year ago

what is RTI? do you consider this right proves that in a democracy citizens dominate the government

Answers

Answered by akshitatewari24
1

This is the age of information affluence. Technology, with its capacity for storing, simplifying and communicating information with astonishing speed has, more than ever, put information at the centre of development. Information is a global resource of unlimited potential for all.


Importantly, information belongs not to the state, the government of the day or civil servants, but to the public. Officials do not create information for their own benefit alone, but for the benefit of the public they serve, as part of the legitimate and routine discharge of the government's duties. Information is generated with public money by public servants paid out of public funds. Therefore, it cannot be unreasonably kept from citizens.


The Right to Information is a Fundamental Human Right


Lack of information denies people the opportunity to develop their potential to the fullest and realise the full range of their human rights. Individual personality, political and social identity and economic capability are all shaped by the information that is available to each person and to society at large. The practice of routinely holding information away from the public creates 'subjects' rather than 'citizens' and is a violation of their rights. This was recognised by the United Nations at its very inception in 1946, when the General Assembly resolved: "Freedom of Information is a fundamental human right and the touchstone for all freedoms to which the United Nations is consecrated" . Enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the right's status as a legally binding treaty obligation was affirmed in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers".This has placed the right to access information firmly within the body of universal human rights law.


The right to access information underpins all other human rights. For example, freedom of expression and thought inherently rely on the availability of adequate information to inform opinions. The realisation of the right to personal safety also requires that people have sufficient information to protect themselves. In Canada, a court has recognised that the right to security creates a corollary right to information about threats to personal safety which would be violated if the police force knew of a threat and failed to provide that information to the threatened individual. The right to food is also often reliant on the right to information. In India for example, people have used access laws to find out about their ration entitlements and to expose the fraudulent distribution of food grains. Quite simply, the right to information is at the core of the human rights system because it enables citizens to more meaningfully exercise their rights, assess when their rights are at risk and determine who is responsible for any violations.


It is important that access to information is recognised as a right because it:


   Accords it sufficient importance, as being inherent to democratic functioning and a pre-condition to good governance and the realisation of all other human rights.


   Becomes part of the accepted international obligations of the state. This means that the right to access information attracts the guarantee of protectionby the state.


   Distances it from being merely an administrative measure by which information is gifted by governments to their people at their discretion since a legally enforceable right cannot be narrowed or ignored at the whim of government.


   Creates a duty-holder on the one hand and a beneficiary of a legal entitlement on the other. Non-disclosure of information is therefore a violation and the beneficiary can seek legal remedy.


   Signals that information belongs to the public and not government. The idea that everything is secret unless there is a strong reason for releasing it is replaced by the idea that all information is available unless there are strong reasons for denying it. The onus is on the duty-holder to prove its case for refusing to disclose documents.


The right to information holds within it the right to seek information, as well as the duty to give information, to store, organise, and make it easily available, and to withhold it only when it is proven that this is in the best public interest. The duty to enable access to information rests with government and encompasses two key aspects: enabling citizens to access information upon request; and proactively disseminating important information.


akshitatewari24: hope it helps
RiazSheikh: yup . thank u
akshitatewari24: wc
Similar questions