Central Information Commission joins privacy debate, lists objections

The Central Information Commission (CIC) plans to make clear its objections against recommendations made by the BN Srikrishna committee on data protection on the grounds that they infringe upon the freedom of speech, undermine the Right to Information (RTI) Act and could prevent the exposure of corruption. The Srikrishna panel’s draft Personal Data Protection Bill was released at the end of July for public comments.

The CIC was established in 2005 under the RTI Act, which is aimed at holding government accountable by allowing individuals to submit information requests. The full CIC had discussed the proposals at a meeting on August 28, people who were present at the meeting told ET.

“The draft bill undermines the RTI Act and proposes curbs on information, which should ideally be in public domain,” said one of them. “It can easily be misused and put curbs as serious as thoseinformation commissioner M Sridhar Acharyulu, who has been vocal about his opposition to the draft. Acharyulu had brought the Srikrishna committee’s recommendations to the notice of the commission and had asked chief information commissioner RK Mathur for a discussion on the matter.

The Srikrishna committee’s report has generated a mixed response, with some welcoming its recommendations as being protective of privacy while others have said they undermine it or don’t do enough.

Information commissioners made the point at their meeting that the draft infringes on the right to freedom of speech and expression enshrined in the constitution, said the person cited above.

Personal data and information should be made public when relevant to upholding the public good, the commissioners argued. Still, some participants were hesitant about conveying their objections at this stage. “There was a view that the bill has not been finalised and the CIC need not step in now,” said the person cited above. “But other information commissioners weighed in and said the intervention should come immediately and the commission should make its opposition known.”

Reservations were also expressed about the so-called right to be forgotten, which gives an individual the power to restrict or prevent the disclosure of personal information by a data fiduciary.

“In criminal cases the politician can invoke this right,” an information commissioner is said to have pointed out. “But if an RTI applicant seeks this information on past criminal cases against the politician, this is in the public good. There are clear internal conflicts between the two laws.”

The CIC will dedicate a session to ‘Data Protection Bill and RTI’ at its annual convention in October, reflecting its concerns over the proposals.
Observers said this will be a first as the transparency watchdog has traditionally steered clear of controversies or the legislative agenda of the Centre during its annual convention.

It generally discusses technical aspects of the RTI Act, disposal and pendency before state commissions during these meetings. implemented during the Emergency.” The task of drawing up the commission’s response has been entrusted to