The right to know is also implicit in Article 19(1) (a) and it has a close link with Article 21 of the Constitution particularly in environmental matters where the secret government decision may affect health, life and livelihood of the people. The right to know or access to information is the basic right for which the people of democratic country like India aspire for. Secrecy erodes the legitimacy of elected governments. On the other hand, the right to know strengthens the participatory democracy. The right to know plays a very important role in environmental matters. Any governmental plan of construction of dam or information of the proposed location of nuclear power stations or thermal power plants and hazardous industries, which directly affect the lives and health of the people of that area, must be widely published. The Judiciary has broadened the scope of the right to know in S. P. Gupta v. Union of India AIR 1982 SC 149 the Supreme Court recognized the right to know to be implicit in the right to free speech and expression. The Supreme Court observed:
“This is the new democratic culture of an open society towards which every liberal democracy is moving and our country should be no exception. The concept of open government is the direct emanation from the right to know which seems to be implicit in Article-19(1) (a). Therefore, disclosures of information in regard to the functioning of the government must be the rule and secrecy exception justified only where the strictest requirements of public interest so demands”.
In L.K. Koolwal v. State AIR 1988 Raj2 the Rajasthan High Court held that a citizen has a right to know about the activities of the State, the instrumentalities, the departments and agencies of the State. The Court further held that, “the State can impose and should impose reasonable restrictions in the matter like other fundamental rights where it affects the national security and other matter affecting the nation’s integrity. But this right is limited and particularly in the matter of sanitation and other allied matter every citizen has a right to know how the state is functioning and why the state is withholding such information in such matters”.
In R.P. Ltd. v. Proprietors, Indian Express Newspapers, Bombay Pvt. Ltd., AIR 1989 SC 190 the Supreme Court held that “we must remember that the people at large have a right to know in order to be able to take part in a participatory development in the industrial life and democracy. Right to know is a basic right to which citizen of a free country aspires in the broadening horizon on the right to life in this age on our land under Article 21 of the Constitution”.
In F.B. Taraporawala v. Bayer India Ltd., (1996) 6 SCC 58 where the question before the court was regarding the relocation/shifting of chemical industries from the populated area of Thane in Mumbai, the Court felt that it has neither the expertise nor in possession of various information which was required to decide one way or the other so far as the question of relocation is concerned. The Court also directed the Constitution of an “authority” under section 3(3) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, which was required to examine the entire matter. Such an authority would have power to examine and know various aspects of development and environment protection and take action accordingly.
0 Comments