"They Have A Point": Supreme Court Acknowledges Political Parties' Apprehensions About Bringing Internal Discussions Under RTI

In the batch of petitions seeking the inclusion of all political parties as "public authorities" under the Right to Information Act, 2005, the Supreme Court made oral remarks suggesting that political parties had valid reasons for not wanting to disclose the details of their candidate selection process. The matter was before a bench consisting of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra. However, due to the Attorney General's absence, the hearing was adjourned to August 1.

The acknowledgment of the fear of political parties by the court came after Advocate PV Dinesh, representing CPI(M), expressed support for transparency regarding financial matters of political parties but argued against disclosing the reasons behind candidate selection and internal party discussions. He submitted–

"So far as transparency of political parties in the area of financial matters is concerned, CPI(M) supports it. But you can't reveal which candidate is selected for what reason or what are the discussions which took place within the political party."

Acknowledging the concerns raised by him, CJI DY Chandrachud commented –

"They have a point. They're saying that don't ask us why we selected a candidate."

To this, SG Tushar Mehta added that the petitioners' demand implied the need for a "superintendent" to monitor the internal workings of political parties, which could pose practical challenges. He said–

"Mr Bhushan wants to know how parties function. He wants a kind of a superintendent. That can't be."

In the hearing today, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioners, argued that political parties should be brought under the RTI Act. He relied on a 2013 judgment of the Central Information Commission (CIC) to state that political parties receive substantial funding and various privileges from the government, making them significant players in the state's affairs. Bhushan pointed out that political parties are registered under the election commission, warranting their accountability under the RTI Act. He said–

"There is a judgement of the CIC of 2013 where they say that yes, they have to be brought under RTI because these political parties are substantially funded in many ways by the government. They are given 100% income tax exemptions etc. They are given official premises for use at virtually no cost. They are given various other concessions. Apart from that, they have held that the political parties play a very substantial role in affairs of the state. Political parties form governments, political parties disqualify MLAs who vote against their whip etc. Therefore, the political parties are registered under the election commission under the RPA. Therefore political parties need to be under RTI."

Sr Adv Gopal Sankarnarayan sought for an urgent listing for the matter and stated that CIC had passed two orders in the matter.

To this, SG Tushar Mehta said–

"CIC order cannot be a basis to seek a writ from your lordships directing the legislature to incorporate a new entity through a broad mandamus."

The matter will now be heard on August 1, 2023. 

Case Title: Association For Democratic Reforms And Anr. v. Union Of India Cabinet Secretary & Ors W.P.(C) No. 333/2015 + connected matters