On 21 September 2026 the Tamil Nadu government issued a G.O. under Section 24 of the RTI Act. The order classified the Public (Law and Order) Department as an “intelligence and security organisation”, thereby removing it from the Act’s purview. After protests from political parties, transparency activists and media scrutiny, the government withdrew the order on 27 September 2026.
Key Developments
- The G.O. was issued on 21 September 2026 but became public only on 27 September 2026.
- Designated officers began citing the order to deny RTI requests as early as 22 September 2026.
- State Law Minister C.T.R. Nirmal Kumar initially defended the move, citing the need to protect sensitive information on communal incidents.
- Within days, the minister announced the withdrawal of the order without detailed explanation.
- The TNSIC is operating with only four of its sanctioned eight Information Commissioners and lacks a Chief Information Commissioner.
- According to the Satark Nagrik Sangathan 2024‑25 report card, the TNSIC had a backlog of over 41,000 appeals and complaints as of June 2026.
Important Facts
The exemption attempted by the state was not a blanket removal; officials claimed it targeted only “sensitive information relating to district‑level inquiries into communal clashes”. However, the RTI Act already contains a long list of exemptions under Section 8. Critics argue that the move was an attempt to sidestep these built‑in safeguards.
Separately, concerns have been raised that the DPDP Act could further dilute RTI provisions by restricting data sharing.
Exam Relevance
- Understanding the scope and limitations of the RTI Act is essential for GS‑2 (Polity) questions on transparency and accountability.
- The case illustrates the use of Section 24 and the procedural requirement of Section 24(5) to place such decisions before the state legislature.
- Role of statutory bodies like the TNSIC highlights the importance of institutional capacity in implementing transparency laws.
- The episode underscores the interplay between newer data‑privacy legislation (DPDP Act) and existing right‑to‑information frameworks.
Way Forward
For a robust transparency regime, the Tamil Nadu government should:
- Strengthen the TNSIC by appointing the full complement of eight Information Commissioners and a Chief Information Commissioner.
- Ensure any exemption under Section 24 is debated in the state legislature as mandated by Section 24(5).
- Address the backlog of RTI appeals by increasing staff, digitising processes, and setting strict timelines.
- Monitor the impact of the DPDP Act to prevent erosion of the right to information.
Only an administration that embraces openness can deliver the promised change and strengthen democratic accountability.