Civil society seeks rollback of DPDP changes to RTI Act

More than 30 civil society organisations on Friday launched a campaign seeking the rollback of a provision in the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act that amended the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

The amendment – allowing authorities to withhold any information containing personal details – restricts journalists, activists, lawyers, and others from accessing crucial information needed to hold governments accountable and expose corruption, they said.

“When a law like the DPDP Act was brought, the hope was that it will balance and protect both the people’s right to information and the right to privacy, but it protects neither,” said Anjali Bhardwaj, co-convenor at National Campaign for Peoples’ Right to Information (NCPRI).

The DPDP Act, passed in 2023, amended a section of the RTI Act, removing the earlier safeguard that allowed disclosure of personal information if it served public interest and did not amount to ‘unwarranted’ invasion of privacy.

This will restrict access to electoral rolls data to ensure accountability in the electoral process, or data on rations, pensions, scholarships, etc for public audits, Bhardwaj said.

Information on non-performing assets or government contractors may also be denied on the grounds that they contain personal information, though it is in the public interest to have this information, she added.

Moreover, the government-controlled Data Protection Board with powers to impose fines of up to Rs 500 crores will impact journalists if there is a complaint against them for publishing data deemed as violating the law, which may be another weapon of the government to shut down inconvenient reporting, Bhardwaj said.Organisations seeking the rollback of this provision include Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), Software Freedom Law Centre (SLFC), Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), Satark Nagrik Sangathan (SNS), Article 21 Trust, Centre for Financial Accountability, Common Cause, People’s Union for Civil Liberties and NCPRI, among others.

“There has to be an amendment to the Act because it has already been passed,” said Nikhil Dey, cofounder of MKSS. “The rules at best can only lay it at abeyance, if it says you don’t make Section 44 (which amends the RTI Act) come into effect.”

These experts said conveying their concerns to the government in consultations has been difficult.

“If you had tried to go and make comments on the rules…you had to go through multiple steps to be able to start putting a comment, and then there was no comment possible on Section 44, which amended it,” Dey said, explaining the decision to launch a campaign.

Apar Gupta, cofounder of IFF, said these fears were voiced “repeatedly and in a reasoned manner…very early on, even prior to the legislation” of the DPDP Act. “There was a joint, concerted effort in saying this neither advances the right to information nor the right to privacy,” he said.

The Act can be weaponised against the political opposition and their social media cells if the government deems them data fiduciaries and the amendment thus poses a danger to democracy, experts said.

This is an important issue for journalists and media freedom, said Pragya Singh, managing committee member, Press Club of India, adding that the law may also compromise the confidentiality of reporters’ sources.

“The process (of gathering and using information for reporting) is being indirectly controlled as journalists will be seen as data processors,” she said.