The National Human Rights Commission has expressed its opinion that to make the proposed Freedom of Information Bill, 2000 conform to articles 19, (1)(a) and 19 (2) of the Constitution, the title of the Bill should be changed from “The Freedom of Information Bill” to “The Right to Information Bill”. Also, the preamble at present proceeds at the basis that the Bill confers for the first time, the freedom to access information. Instead, according to NHRC, the preamble should convey that the Bill provides a system for access to a right, which already exists. The Bill should be examined in the light of Article 19 (1)(a) which guarantees to every citizen the right to freedom of speech and expression as a fundamental right and in particular, Section 8 of the Bill should be re-examined to ensure that the provisions are within the ambit of permissible restrictions under Article 19(2). The Commission had taken up the Freedom of Information Bill for an indepth examination, in fulfillment of its statutory responsibility to review laws under Section 12 (d) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. It had received comments and suggestions in this regard from the NGO, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative and from Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court. Later, based on the Commission’s own examination and deliberations, it finalized its comments on the Bill and has sent them to the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting for appropriate action.

According to the Commission’s opinion, it has been judicially recognized that the right to freedom of speech and expression in Article 19 (1)(a) includes right to acquire information. The State is not merely under an obligation to respect the fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution but is also under an obligation to operationalise the meaningful exercise of this right. Thus the State is under an obligation not only to respect but also to ensure conditions in which the right of acquiring information, which is part of freedom of speech and expression, can be meaningfully and effectively enjoyed. The Court in the case of Reliance vs. Indian Express (1988) 4 SCC 592 said: “Right to know is a basic right which citizens of a free country aspire to in the broader horizon of the right to live in this age in our land under Article 21 of our constitution”. Since the right to information is an integral part of the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 (a), any restrictions on this right must fall within the permissible parameters of Article 19(2).

Thus, the Commission feels that the aims and objectives of any law on the subject have to be to regulate and operationalise the right to information and facilitate the enjoyment of this right by citizens. The question is whether and to what extent the Freedom of Information Bill, 2000 introduced in Parliament in 2000 and on which the Standing Committee of Parliament has recently submitted its report, meets these aims and objectives.

The Commission, thus, has given its opinion in respect of only the salient features of the Bill, leaving consideration of minor details in the light of the basic premise indicated above.