NEW DELHI— A storm is brewing in India over a contentious provision in the country’s new Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP), with activists warning that it could dismantle the hard-won transparency enshrined in the Right to Information (RTI) Act. At the heart of the debate is Section 44(3), a clause that critics say hands the government a blank check to shield personal data—potentially cloaking public officials from scrutiny and leaving citizens in the dark.
The Clash of Laws
Passed with presidential assent on August 11, 2023, the DPDP Act aims to safeguard digital personal data while balancing privacy with lawful data use. But Section 44(3) has sparked outrage by rewriting a key part of the RTI Act, a 2005 law hailed as a cornerstone of democratic accountability.
The original RTI provision, Section 8(1)(j), allowed personal information to be withheld only if it had no bearing on public interest or invaded privacy unjustifiably. Now, the new amendment broadens that exemption to cover all personal information, no questions asked—a move activists call a “sledgehammer to transparency.”
“This isn’t just a tweak; it’s a gut punch to the RTI,” said a prominent RTI advocate, at a press conference last week. She and fellow activists argue that the change could block access to vital details—like the assets and liabilities of public servants—that have long been public under the RTI to ensure accountability.
A Political Firestorm
The controversy has ignited a fierce political backlash. A Congress leader fired off a letter to Electronics and Information Technology Minister on March 23, demanding the repeal of Section 44(3). “It virtually destroys the RTI Act,” he wrote, accusing the government of eroding a tool that empowers citizens to hold power to account. The opposition isn’t alone—civil society groups and legal experts are rallying to halt what they see as a rollback of democratic rights.
The government, however, defends the law, arguing it aligns with a 2017 Supreme Court ruling affirming privacy as a fundamental right. Officials say the amendment strikes a necessary balance, protecting individuals while still allowing some disclosures under a narrow proviso. But critics aren’t buying it, pointing out that the vague wording leaves too much room for abuse.
What’s at Stake?
For years, the RTI Act has been a lifeline for journalists, researchers, and ordinary citizens seeking answers from a notoriously opaque bureaucracy. Shyamlal Yadav, an investigative reporter with The Indian Express, has used it to expose everything from polluted rivers to the foreign jaunts of public officials.
“This change could slam the door shut on that kind of reporting,” he warned. Activists fear that blanket exemptions for “personal information” might hide corruption or mismanagement behind a wall of secrecy.
ALSO READ: Now Open: Pan-India Registration for Fraud Investigators!
The DPDP Act won’t fully take effect until its rules are finalized, giving opponents a slim window to push back. In January, the Ministry invited feedback on draft rules, but with the comment period closed since February 18, time is ticking. RTI champions are now pressing lawmakers to act before the law locks in what they call a “chilling precedent.”
A Broader Battle
This isn’t just about data—it’s about power. The DPDP Act’s critics see it as part of a larger pattern, with the government accused of tightening its grip on information. From the Data Protection Board’s government-appointed members to hefty fines of up to $30 million for violations, the law’s framework has raised red flags about centralized control.
For now, the fight over Section 44(3) is shaping up as a showdown between privacy and the public’s right to know—with India’s democratic soul hanging in the balance.