SC says RTI activism is now a business:Govt can oversee its own work; Top court asks, ‘Who are the activists to monitor?’

The Supreme Court said on Monday that RTI activism has become a new business. The Court remarked while hearing the anticipatory bail plea of RTI activist Rakesh Behal and his associate. It rejected their bail application. Rakesh Behal and Rajiv Kumar are accused of obstructing road construction work in Gurdaspur, Punjab. They are also accused of intimidating people supervising the project and labourers working at the site. A bench of Justices Sandeep Mehta and Vijay Bishnoi said, “Who are you to monitor the construction of these roads? What authority do you have? Who gave you these rights?” Earlier, on May 14, the Punjab and Haryana High Court had refused to grant anticipatory bail to both men. What is RTI activism? RTI (Right to Information) activism involves using the Right to Information law to promote transparency in government functioning, expose corruption and ensure accountability to the public. Under the law, social activists and ordinary citizens can seek important information from government departments on matters of public interest. However, in recent years, there have also been cases where some people allegedly misused the law to intimidate or blackmail officials. Arvind Kejriwal was also an RTI activist Former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal gained recognition for exposing corruption through RTI applications. He was awarded the Ramon Magsaysay Award in 2006 for his work. Supreme Court said PIL has become ‘Paisa interest litigation’ On May 5, the Supreme Court said that Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has increasingly turned into Private Interest Litigation, Publicity Interest Litigation, Money Interest Litigation and Political Interest Litigation. The Court questioned the intention behind a 2006 PIL filed by the Indian Young Lawyers Association, which challenged the ban on the entry of women aged 10 to 50 into the Sabarimala Temple in Kerala. The Court said such PILs amount to an abuse of the legal process and added that the Association should focus on the welfare of lawyers and its younger members rather than filing such petitions. ​