Before the enactment of Right to Information (RTI) Act in 2005, Indian democracy was constrained by the Official Secrets Act of the British Raj, which was framed in 1923 to protect the interests of the British government and which had survived long after Independence, to serve the vested interests of Indian bureaucrats and politicians. The very principle of democracy had been undermined for almost six decades through the withholding of information from the public. An informed citizenry and transparency of information are vital to the functioning of democracy because these serve to contain corruption and to hold governments and their instrumentalities accountable.

The enforcement of the RTI Act gives precedence to the people`s `right to know` over the officials` `right to secrecy`. The RTI Act is meant to provide voice to civil society and to create a watchdog, independent of the state. It is the turn of the citizens to use this Act in the spirit of the law to provide society with a platform to share its concerns in the decision-making processes of the officialdom.

The desirous effects of this Act will be achieved only when every citizen of India feels empowered by the provisions of the Act. Thus, we need to look into the practical applications of this Act. The emphasis must be to break the habit of years of neglect of our basic rights and cataleptic acceptance of the poor quality of life enforced on us for decades. 

As a developing nation and working under the new paradigms of liberalisation, globalisation and privatisation, India has seen rapid transformation in its economy, technology, service industry and manufacturing capabilities. Centuries of industrial innovation have provided a few privileged groups with comforts and luxuries whereas those who work in these industries have been paying with their lives because of the hazardous nature of their work.

In India, the central and state ministries of labour are responsible for most issues related to labour welfare and labour rights. The ministries exercise their control through various governmental offices, autonomous bodies, adjudicating bodies, directorates, attached offices and subordinate offices. Many have an administrative role to play and a few are research and training bodies under the ministry.

The major law enforcing agency is the organisation of the Chief Labour Commissioner (CLC), also known as the Central Industrial Relations Machinery (CIRM). The important legislations administered by the CIRM are: The Industrial Disputes Act 1947, The Contract Labour Act 1970, The Child Labour (P&R) Act 1986, The Maternity Benefit Act 1961, Building and Other Construction Workers` Act 1996, The Minimum Wages Act 1948, The Payment of Gratuity Act 1972, The Equal Remuneration Act 1976, The Inter-State Migrant Workmen Act 1979, etc. None of these Acts addresses the health and safety of workers at workplaces directly. However, the denial of provisions of these Acts may adversely affect the health of workers indirectly. For example, the employment of children in many of the hazardous occupations will severely jeopardise their health and safety if it were not prohibited by The Child Labour (P&R) Act.  

The law relating to the regulation of labour employed in factories is the Factories Act 1948. The Inspectorate of Factories looks after the enforcement of this Act related to occupational health, safety, welfare, work-environment, leave with wages, working hours, etc. However, these provisions for the safety, health and welfare of the workers are generally inadequate and unsatisfactory, and their protection does not extend to the large masses of workers employed in workplaces not covered by the Act.

The Employees` State Insurance Act, 1948 (ESIC Act) envisioned an integrated need-based, social insurance scheme that protects the interest of workers in contingencies such as sickness, maternity, employment injuries causing temporary or permanent physical disabilities, death or loss of wages or loss of earning capacity. 

The Directorate General of Factory Advice Service & Labour Institutes (DGFASLI), formerly known as the Chief Adviser of Factories, achieved significant importance as an office attached to the Ministry of Labour and serving as a technical arm to assist the ministry in the formulation of national policies on occupational safety and health in factories and docks. The Dock Workers (Safety, Health and Welfare) Act 1986 and the Regulations 1990 provide for the safety, health and welfare of the dock workers. The provisions are enforced by the DGFASLI through the Inspectorates of Dock Safety set up in all the major ports in India. The DGFASLI comprises its headquarters in Mumbai, five labour institutes (Central Labour Institute in Mumbai, Regional Labour Institutes in Kolkata, Chennai, Kanpur and Faridabad) and 11 Inspectorates of Dock Safety (in Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, Kandla, Mormugao, Tuticorin, New Mangalore, Kochi, Visakhapatnam, Paradip and Navi Mumbai). Similarly, the Director General of Mines Safety (DGMS), Ministry of Labour, is responsible for the health and safety of mine workers.

The major objectives of the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad, and its two Regional Occupational Health Centres (ROHCs: Bangalore and Kolkata) are to identify and mitigate the occupational and environmental health problems in the country. The tools used for this purpose are research, education and information dissemination. The NIOH functions as a WHO Collaborative and Reference Centre for Occupational Health. The NIOH has represented in many important functions of the Govt of India, including the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Ministry of Labour, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Ministry of Agriculture, etc., to generate data and provide guidance and recommendations on issues related to occupational and environmental health. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has identified occupational health as one of the national priority areas in the IX Five Year Plan and the NIOH has been identified as the nodal agency for nine projects. 

That the workers health and safety is protected by so many legal possibilities may seem impressive, but in reality these provisions exist in law books only. Although some of the good health and safety practices are implemented by multinational companies only to promote business, these practices are restricted to paperwork for legal compliance only in others businesses, which have no buyer/consumer pressures. The health and safety conditions of unorganised sector workers are gloomier and none of these laws provides protection to these workers.

The onus of improving the workplace health lies with all the stakeholders. However, under the above circumstances, workers, workers unions, and trade unions must take the lead role. They all need to empower themselves with the knowledge and information required to coerce the employers and governments to follow the legal framework.

The RTI Act should be used as a tool to gather the desired information, for example, trade unions or workers can find out the hazards and health affects associated with particular work, the safety procedures and equipment required, the exposure assessment data, medical facilities, injuries, accidents, workplace sicknesses, absenteeism, deaths, permanent disabilities, training programmes, welfare schemes, etc. If not provided or denied by the employer, this can be sought under the RTI Act. Similarly, delays and denial of justice (compensation, rehabilitation, etc.) can be expedited when the concerned officials are asked to justify the same. However, workers and trade unions need to use the RTI as a means to receive justice and not merely for collecting information.