Amity Law School

RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT AND REPRESENTATION OF

THE PEOPLE ACT, 1951
ELECTORAL REFROMS

1
 Amity Law School

The Intersection of the RTI Act and RPA

• The Intersection has significant implications for

transparency, accountability, and citizen participation in the
electoral process.
• The RTI Act, which grants citizens access to public
information, has emerged as a powerful tool in
complementing and reinforcing the provisions of the RPA.
• The intersection of the RTI and the RPA enables citizens to
seek information regarding various aspects of the electoral
process.

2
 Amity Law School

• It empowers individuals to obtain details about voter lists,

election schedules, candidate nominations, and expenditure
reports, among other election-related information.
• This provision promotes transparency and allows citizens to
scrutinize the conduct of elections and hold public
authorities accountable.
• One significant aspect of the intersection between the RTI
and the RPA is the transparency it brings to political party
funding.

3
 Amity Law School

• The RTI Act allows citizens to seek information about the

funding sources and financial records of political parties.
• This provision enables greater accountability and reduces
the influence of undisclosed and illicit funds in the electoral
process.
• Criminal background of candidates.
• The RTI Act enables citizens to obtain information
regarding the criminal records and pending cases against
candidates contesting elections.
• This provision allows voters to make informed choices and
holds candidates accountable for their past actions.
4
 Amity Law School

• Intersection had a transformative impact on transparency

and accountability in the electoral process.
• It has enhanced the ability of citizens to access crucial
information, monitor electoral practices, and participate
actively in democratic decision-making.
• The intersection of the Right to Information and the
Representation of the People Act 1951 has revolutionized
the electoral landscape in India.

5
 Amity Law School

Case Laws
• Lily Thomas vs. Union of India
It is significant judgment by the Supreme Court of India that
addressed the disqualification of elected representatives with
criminal convictions. The case, heard in 2013, had far-
reaching implications for the integrity of the political system
and the representation of citizens. Lily Thomas, a social
activist, and advocate, filed a public interest litigation (PIL)
challenging the validity of Section 8(4) of the Representation
of the People Act, 1951 (RPA). This provision allowed
convicted lawmakers to retain their seats in the legislature if
they filed an appeal within a specified timeframe.

6
 Amity Law School

• The Supreme Court, in its judgment, declared Section 8(4)

of the RPA as unconstitutional. It held that lawmakers
convicted of offenses resulting in a jail term of two years or
more would be disqualified from holding office
immediately, even if they filed an appeal. The court noted
that the disqualification was necessary to uphold the
sanctity of the democratic process and maintain the public’s
faith in elected representatives.

7
 Amity Law School

• The Lily Thomas Case aimed to cleanse the political system

and promote ethical governance by disqualifying
individuals with criminal backgrounds from holding public
office. The judgment emphasized that the intention behind
the RPA was to prevent individuals with criminal records
from influencing the legislative process and affecting the
public interest.

8
 Amity Law School

Mohinder Singh Gill v. The Chief Election AIR 1978 851

• In the Gill Case, the court was tasked with examining the
validity of the election of Mohinder Singh Gill, who had
won a parliamentary seat in the 1971 general elections. The
petitioner, Kanta Kathuria, challenged Gill’s election on the
grounds of corrupt practices during the electoral process.
• The case raised important questions regarding the integrity
of elections, the secrecy of voting, and the impact of corrupt
practices on the democratic process. The Supreme Court, in
its judgment, highlighted the fundamental importance of
free and fair elections in a democratic society.

9
 Amity Law School

• It emphasized that elections should be conducted without

any corrupt practices or influence that could undermine the
integrity of the electoral process. The court stated that the
secrecy of voting was a crucial aspect of ensuring free
elections and discouraging corrupt practices.

10