Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 15 April 2025

Content:

1. Unnecessary change
2. History as battlefield — the perils of reversing the past

Unnecessary change

 Background Context:

• RTI Act (2005): A landmark legislation that empowered citizens to seek information from public authorities, enhancing transparency, accountability, and participatory governance.
• Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act: Permits withholding of personal information unless there is an overriding public interest or if the information has a direct relationship to public activity or public interest.

Relevance : GS 2(Governance)

Practice Question :“The recent amendment to the Right to Information Act through the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 undermines the balance between transparency and privacy.” Critically examine the implications of this amendment on democratic accountability in India.

(250 Words)

 The DPDP Act & Section 44(3):

• DPDP Act, 2023: Enacted to protect personal data, arising from the K.S. Puttaswamy (2017) verdict that declared right to privacy a fundamental right under Article 21.
• Section 44(3) of DPDP Act: Amends RTI Act’s Section 8(1)(j) by allowing blanket denial of personal information without considering public interest.

Key Concerns with the Amendment:

Undermining Transparency

• Removes the “public interest override“ clause — weakening the very essence of accountability.
• RTI Act was already equipped to handle privacy concerns via reasonable restrictions in Section 8(1)(j).

Vague Definition of ‘Personal Information’

• The amendment lacks clarity — almost any data (e.g., educational qualifications, caste certificates, service records) could now be classified as “personal” and denied.
• This opens the door to arbitrary interpretation and denial of legitimate RTI queries.

Potential for Abuse

• Public officials could suppress information under the pretext of personal data.
• E.g., in cases like forged caste certificates or fake degrees, public interest outweighs privacy — but the amended law may block such disclosures.

Contradiction with Puttaswamy Judgment

• The judgment never called for amending RTI; it acknowledged the need to balance privacy and transparency — which the original RTI Act already does.

Misuse Argument is Weak

• The government claims the amendment prevents “misuse” of RTI.
• However, RTI misuse is not widespread, and existing provisions (penalties for frivolous RTIs) already act as safeguards.

 Legal & Ethical Implications:

• Legislative Overreach: Amending a transparency law through a privacy law sidesteps parliamentary debate and undermines democratic processes.
• Chilling Effect on Accountability: Reduces the incentive for honest disclosure by public officials.
• Dilution of Citizen Empowerment: Citizens lose a powerful tool to demand governance reforms or expose corruption.

 Civil Society Response:

• Transparency activists and watchdog groups argue the amendment is regressive.
• Demand for removal or rollback of the Section 44(3) amendment from the DPDP Act.

 Conclusion:

• The RTI Act already balances privacy and transparency effectively.
• The amendment is legally unnecessary, politically undesirable, and ethically questionable.
• To uphold democratic accountability, the government must repeal the amendment and ensure RTI’s core purpose remains intact.

History as battlefield — the perils of reversing the past

Context & Background

• In March 2025, textbook revisions and public campaigns emerged targeting few rulers and monuments.
• Historical narratives are being selectively reinterpreted to glorify certain native rulers while demonizing others.
• These actions coincide with rising public anger, ideological polarization, and identity politics.

Relevance : GS 1(History) ,GS 2(Social Issues)

Practice Question : “Rewriting history with a revisionist agenda often leads to division rather than reconciliation.” Critically examine the impact of historical revisionism on social cohesion and democratic values in India.(250 Words)

Understanding History: Role and Responsibility

• History is not a binary of heroes and villains; it involves causes, consequences, and context.
• It should function as a guide for the present — not a battlefield to settle contemporary scores.
• The weaponization of history transforms it from a tool of reflection to a means of division.

Revisionism vs. Reinterpretation

• Reinterpretation is:
  • An academic process.
  • Based on new evidence or emerging perspectives.
  • Enhances understanding without compromising integrity.

• Revisionism, particularly political:
  • Distorts facts to suit current ideologies or political agendas.
  • Linked to nationalism, religious supremacy, and territorial disputes.
  • Creates divisive narratives that deepen social cleavages.

Global Case Studies of Dangerous Revisionism

1. The Crusades (1096–1291):
   1. Claimed to reclaim Christian holy lands.
   1. Led to centuries of violence, not reconciliation.

• Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648):
  • A product of religious revisionism post-Reformation.
  • Caused massive death and economic ruin in Europe.

• Nazi Germany:
  • Hitler’s ideology was built on mythical Aryan past and post-WWI grievances.
  • Resulted in World War II and the Holocaust.

• Israel-Palestine Conflict:
  • Ongoing struggle over divergent historical claims.
  • Demonstrates the irreconcilability of revisionist narratives.

• Russia-Ukraine War (2022 onwards):
  • Russia used historical unity as justification for invasion.
  • Aimed at reversing post-Soviet independence of Ukraine.

Key Insights

• Historical grievances are not always meant to be avenged, but understood.
• The idea of reversing history to reclaim lost glory may leads to instability.
• Selective remembrance distorts public memory and hinders reconciliation.

History as a Guide, Not a Grudge

• The role of history is:
  • To educate, not inflame.
  • To promote empathy, not hostility.
  • To strengthen democratic values, not erode them.
• Quoting George Santayana:
  “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Consequences of Historical Revisionism

• Marginalizes minority contributions.
• Leads to communal tensions and cultural erasure.
• Damages academic integrity and civil discourse.

Way Forward

• Encourage inclusive and evidence-based history education.
• Resist politicization of curriculum and historical monuments.
• Promote historical reckoning with empathy and balance.
• Uphold constitutional values of secularism and pluralism.