Retired officials may be hesitant to take decisions against departments they once worked for, leading to compromised decisions. Lack of expertise in transparency is a major issue. Retired civil servants may lack the specialized knowledge needed to promote transparency, which is a core part of the RTI Act. Retired bureaucrats may be disconnected from current social issues, which may reduce their ability to effectively address public grievances. Information commissioners coming from administrative backgrounds may not fully understand public concerns about access to information from a contemporary perspective. Appointment of bureaucrats with long-term government affiliations may reduce accountability, as their decisions may be aligned with government interests. Bureaucrats with ties to specific political parties may show reluctance to challenge government decisions, which may reduce the independence of the RTI framework.
The dominance of retired civil servants as information commissioners in India has raised concerns about the independence and diversity of the Right to Information (RTI) framework. While their experience can be valuable, it has sparked debate over potential biases and limited representation. The paper explores the implications of such dominance and the need for reforms to broaden eligibility criteria for candidates. There are a number of concerns about independence and diversity in the RTI framework. The dominance of retired civil servants creates a narrow, homogenous approach, which reduces diversity in decision-making processes. Retired bureaucrats are often perceived as part of the establishment, limiting their ability to objectively challenge government actions. Former government employees may display bias toward their former colleagues, which can reduce fairness in handling appeals.
A retired official may be hesitant to take decisions against departments they once worked for, leading to compromised decisions. Lack of expertise in transparency is a major issue. Retired civil servants may lack the specialized knowledge needed to promote transparency, which is a core part of the RTI Act. Retired bureaucrats may be disconnected from current social issues, which may reduce their ability to effectively address public grievances. Information commissioners coming from administrative backgrounds may not fully understand public concerns about access to information from a contemporary perspective. Appointment of bureaucrats with long-term government affiliations may reduce accountability, as their decisions may be aligned with government interests. Bureaucrats with ties to specific political parties may show reluctance to challenge government decisions, which may reduce the independence of the RTI framework.
The dominance of retired civil servants has a domino effect. When the selection pool lacks diversity, the public may lose faith in the neutrality of the RTI framework. The dominance of bureaucrats with limited fresh perspectives contributes to inefficiency, increasing delays in the processing of RTI appeals. The CIC’s backlog of 23,000 appeals suggests that bureaucratic appointments without fresh perspectives can hinder the timely resolution of citizen grievances. The lack of diversity in appointments results in power being concentrated in the hands of a few individuals with similar backgrounds. This practice prevents innovative ideas or changes in approach that could improve the efficacy of the RTI Act. Without diverse inputs, the RTI framework may fail to adapt to modern needs, preventing improvements that could make it more effective. If people feel that decisions are biased or influenced by former government officials, they may feel less inclined to engage with the RTI process.
Reforms are urgently needed to broaden the pool of qualified candidates. Involving professionals with different expertise will bring a broader perspective to decision-making. This ensures diverse perspectives in the RTI framework. In countries such as the UK, information commissioners come from backgrounds such as law, journalism, and education, which promote independence and impartiality. A public, transparent selection process will promote impartiality and give everyone an equal opportunity to apply for information commissioner roles. The US uses a public nomination process for many government oversight roles, which ensures transparency and accountability in the selection of candidates. Limiting tenure and imposing age restrictions can promote new perspectives and allow for dynamic leadership within information commissions. Many nations, such as Australia, limit the tenure of senior officials to avoid inertia in the long term and encourage new ideas.
A more inclusive approach with representatives from civil society can help ensure that the RTI system is responsive to public needs. The National Human Rights Commission includes members from non-governmental organizations, strengthening its approach to human rights through diverse perspectives. Expanding outreach and awareness for applications: Actively publicizing vacancies and increasing outreach programs will help attract candidates from different professional backgrounds, creating a more diverse pool. Countries such as New Zealand run nationwide campaigns to raise awareness of public sector vacancies, attracting skilled professionals from different sectors. To ensure the independence and diversity of the RTI framework, reforms are necessary. Expanding the pool of eligible candidates by including professionals from diverse fields can bring in new perspectives, reduce bias, and increase accountability. A more inclusive approach will strengthen the transparency of the system, increasing public trust in the long term.
