A Constitution bench of the Supreme Court will decide on the conflict between the right of citizens to obtain information under the RTI Act and the right of the judiciary to not disclose information pertaining to the judiciary, such as the appointment of judges, transfers and collegium decisions. A three-judge bench of justices Ranjan Gogoi, Prafulla C. Pant and A.M. Kanwilkar asked Chief Justice of India T.S. Thakur to post before a Constitution Bench the issues raised in the appeal the central public information officer (CPIO) of the Supreme Court against a Delhi high court judgment directing that information on appointment of judges be furnished.
Acting on a petition from S.C. Agrawal, the CIC directed the CPIO to furnish information on the correspondence exchanged between constitutional authorities with file notings relating to the appointments of Justice H.L. Dattu, Justice A.K. Ganguly and Justice R.M. Lodha (all to the Supreme court) superseding Justice A.P. Shah. The Delhi high court confirmed this order. The present appeal is directed against this order.
The bench said, “We are of the considered opinion that a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution is involved in the present case which is required to be heard by a Constitution Bench. The case on hand raises important questions of constitutional importance relating to the position of the CJI and the independence of the judiciary on the one hand and on the other the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression.”
The bench recalled the earlier reference order which said “RTI Act merely recognises the constitutional right of citizens to freedom of speech and expression. Independence of judiciary forms part of basic structure of the Constitution. The independence of judiciary and fundamental right to free speech and expression are of a great value and both are required to be balanced. The current debate is a sign of a healthy nation. This debate on the Constitution involves great and fundamental issues. Most of the times we reel under the pressure of precedents.”
The bench said questions like does the concept of independence of the judiciary require that the information should not be furnished, does the information amount to interference in the functioning of the judiciary, and so on will have to be considered.
Does the information have to be withheld to avoid any erosion in the credibility of the decisions and to ensure a free and frank expression of honest opinion by all the constitutional functionaries, which is essential for effective consultation and for taking the right decision and is the information sought for is exempt under Section 8(i)(j) of the RTI Act
