The Official Secrets Act, 1923

Introduction

The Official Secrets Act, 1923 (hereinafter cited as ‘OSA’ or ‘the Act’) is an anti-espionage act that had its genesis in an environment of mistrust and secrecy, at some stage in the British colonial rule over India. The intention at the back of the enactment was to stop the newspapers and the freedom fighters that adverse the British guidelines in India. Within its ambit falls topics of confidentiality and secrets and techniques with appreciation to the authorities of India. It is, therefore, concerned with matters of espionage, sedition, and threats to countrywide safety and integrity. It extends to the whole of India and applies to citizens, authorities’ servants, and non-residential Indians as well. Amongst the numerous sections below the Act, Sections 3 and 5 are of grave significance and are generally invoked. Section 3 of the Act deals with spying, while Section 5 deals with disclosing governmental secrets and techniques. According to Section 5, such disclosure may be completed via the means of mystery code, password, sketch, model, note, plan, article, information, or documents.

Issues with OSA

One of the important issues with OSA is that it is in conflict with the Right to Information Act, 2005. In respect of the strength struggle among the two Acts, the Supreme Court, whilst looking at the Rafale row, held that the RTI Act supersedes OSA. Section 22 and 8(2) of the RTI are beneficial to validate equality. Section 22 of the RTI Act expressly states that RTI Act has an overriding impact on the OSA. Section 8(2) of the RTI Act compels the authorities to reveal facts this is important to be disclosed for the general public interest. RTI Act has caused a cultural shift with legal provisions in the desire for transparency. However, if a record has been categorized as a “mystery” with the aid of using the OSA, such record might not fall below the purview of the RTI Act. Neither the term “mystery” is described in OSA nor what files are probably categorized as “official secrets”. Therefore, it is left to the discretion of the authorities to determine what falls under the purview of “mystery” or ‘official secret”. Section 8 and 9 of the RTI Act permits the authorities to refuse the disclosure of such data. This has been criticized as secrecy allowed under OSA goes head-to-head with the precept of transparency that democracy needs to observe. It has consequently been the priority of numerous activists that the authorities would possibly cover certain information worth of public interest and hide it as a “mystery” under the OSA.

Bail under OSA

Bail under OSA Academicians and jurors have expressed their criticism within side the route of OSA and the way judges are more likely to deny bail if a person is booked under the OSA. The purpose commonly given for the same is countrywide protection. It, consequently, will become lots more difficult to be contested in opposition to such charges. According to a Human Rights Watch report, by the time someone proves that there was no mystery and that he wasn’t chargeable for any countrywide security breach, the individual might have spent a whole lot of his years in prison. Such are the biases in opposition to a person charged under OSA. OSA and Spying. The Act has been indistinct whilst defining what falls under the purview of “spying”. The definition is a long way too broad together with making, receiving, or speaking any record that is probably utilized by the foreign country, directly or indirectly, against our country India. There is a lack of clarity within side the definition and for that reason, it’d cause both judicial interpretation or authorities to define the term as per their whim. The burden of evidence under Section 3(2) of the Act falls towards the accused, which makes it even tougher for the accused. Human Rights Watch calls it a complicated issue of the Act.

Misuse towards reporters or journalists

History is witnessing that OSA has been used towards the reporters by the government when they go against the government in their reporting. Before the Rajeev Sharma case, the recent incident that occurred was in March of 2019, while the government went to the Supreme Court declaring that files of the Rafale aircraft deal have been stolen from the Defence Ministry. They accused the Hindu and its Chairman of penalization under OSA for publishing articles primarily based totally on the contents of the stated files. In 2011, Mid-Day journalist, Tarakand Dwivedi, was arrested and accused of criminal trespass over authorities’ belongings and leaking the information that following the 26/11 attack, weapons have been stored in a facility with a leaking roof. Later it came to light that the stated authorities’ belongings were not a prohibited land. Such activities could have a chilling impact on the journalists, that’s why OSA is a problem for the reporters whilst covering stories relating to protection and intelligence.

Efforts to reform or repeal OSA

As in step with reviews among 2014 -2016 over 50 instances had been filed for violation of OSA in India, out of which 30 have been suggested in 2016, nine in 2015, and eleven in 2014. In 2006, the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (SARC) had encouraged repealing OSA or including provisions of OSA in the National Security Act.

The authorities refused to act upon the reviews of the SARC and expressed that there is a need to amend certain provisions to remove ambiguity. In 2015, a committee was formed with the aid of using the authorities to look at the discrepancies within side the OSA with admire to the RTI Act. Though the movement becomes initiated, no similar measures have been taken to finish the movement. To keep the status of democracy, transparency is an important precept. With the OSA in force, there may be little that humans can do while the authorities are attempting to hide facts under the OSA. This British legacy of distrust and secrecy way of life ought to be done away with to reinforce the democracy that India stands for in the Constitution.

Aishwarya Says:

I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.

If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.

Do follow me on FacebookTwitter  Youtube and Instagram.

The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.

If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at adv.aishwaryasandeep@gmail.com

We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.

We are also running a series Inspirational Women from January 2021 to March 31,2021, featuring around 1000 stories about Indian Women, who changed the world. #choosetochallenge

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.