Anna Hazare threatens indefinite hunger strike as Maharashtra revamps RTI rules

The veteran activist has set a July 5 deadline for the state government to scrap recent amendments that he claims will cripple public transparency.

Ralegan Siddhi’s most famous resident is back on the protest path. Anna Hazare has issued a stern ultimatum to the Maharashtra government, declaring he will launch an indefinite hunger strike starting July 5 unless the state retracts its controversial new Right to Information (RTI) rules. The activist, who was the face of the historic anti-corruption movement over a decade ago, argues that the June 12 amendments are not merely bureaucratic tweaks but a deliberate attempt to "blunt the edge" of a law designed for the common citizen.

A push for transparency or a barrier to access?

At the heart of the standoff is Hazare’s contention that the state government bypassed necessary public consultation before pushing through these changes. In a letter addressed to Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, Hazare outlined his core objections. He is particularly incensed by the hike in application fees, pointing out that the RTI Act was never intended to be a revenue-generating mechanism for the state. If the government insists on increasing costs for citizens after two decades, he argues, there should be a corresponding, aggressive increase in the penalties levied against public information officers who withhold data.

The amendments also introduce a requirement for applicants to provide mandatory identification proof. Hazare views this as a direct assault on the spirit of the 2005 Act, specifically citing Section 6(2), which explicitly states that an applicant should not be required to disclose personal details or justify why they are seeking information. By imposing these barriers, the activist warns that the administration is effectively putting a target on the backs of whistleblowers and social activists who rely on anonymity to expose systemic rot.

The bigger picture: Why this matters

This development is a stark reminder of the fragile balance between administrative efficiency and the public’s right to know. When a law like the RTI is made more technical or "administration-centric," the immediate casualty is the average citizen who lacks the resources to navigate complex red tape. By framing the move as an attempt to make the process "costly," Hazare is tapping into a deeper anxiety: that transparency in India is being slowly diluted by those who find the light of public scrutiny inconvenient.

For the Maharashtra government, this is a high-stakes moment. Ignoring a figure like Hazare—who holds significant moral capital—could reignite public discourse on the state of democratic institutions. If the government fails to provide a robust financial analysis or a rational justification for these rules, the upcoming protest could gain traction beyond just the circles of RTI activists, potentially turning into a wider debate on executive accountability.