The Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India Bill, 2025 — or the SHANTI Bill — has triggered a sharp debate over transparency in governance. At the heart of the controversy lies Section 39, a provision that explicitly overrides the Right to Information Act, 2005, raising concerns about unchecked secrecy in one of India’s most sensitive sectors.
What Section 39 of the SHANTI Bill provides
Section 39 empowers the Central government to classify a wide range of nuclear-related information as “restricted”. This includes details on the location, quantity, quality, acquisition, and disposal of nuclear materials, as well as information on the design, siting, construction, and operation of nuclear power plants and reactors.
The scope extends beyond physical infrastructure. Regulatory submissions made to oversight bodies can also be declared “strategic, sensitive or confidential for business purposes” at the instance of applicants, including private players.
Crucially, Section 39(4) states that once information is notified as restricted, it is completely excluded from disclosure under the Right to Information Act, regardless of context.
How this departs from the RTI framework
The RTI Act was enacted to promote transparency and accountability across public authorities, while still recognising legitimate limits. Section 8 of the Act already allows denial of information if disclosure would harm national security, strategic or scientific interests, foreign relations, or lead to an offence. Commercial confidence, fiduciary information, cabinet deliberations, and personal data are also protected.
Most importantly, the RTI framework includes a public interest override. Even exempt information can be disclosed if the larger public interest outweighs the potential harm. Denials are not final — they can be challenged through statutory appeals and ultimately reviewed by information commissions or courts.
Why Section 39 is seen as a reversal
Unlike RTI exemptions, Section 39 creates an absolute bar. Once information is classified as restricted, the RTI Act “does not apply at all”. There is no requirement for justification, no balancing of public interest, and no appellate mechanism available to citizens.
This marks a reversal of the post-RTI legal hierarchy. While the Atomic Energy Act also contained secrecy provisions, those predated the RTI Act. After 2005, transparency obligations were presumed to prevail unless a specific RTI exemption applied. The SHANTI Bill inverts this logic by placing notified secrecy beyond RTI’s reach.
Concerns over accountability and oversight
Critics argue that the problem is not the protection of sensitive nuclear information — which the RTI Act already permits — but the finality and breadth of secrecy under Section 39. By eliminating the possibility of appeals, the provision removes institutional checks on executive discretion.
Transparency activists have warned that this could deter whistleblowing and independent scrutiny, especially in scenarios involving safety lapses or nuclear accidents. With private entities expected to play a larger role in India’s nuclear energy expansion, the absence of RTI-based oversight raises fears of regulatory capture and information asymmetry.
Implications for democratic governance
Section 39 highlights a broader tension between national security and the citizen’s right to know. While nuclear energy undeniably involves strategic sensitivities, democratic accountability rests on proportional restrictions rather than blanket exclusions.
By taking entire categories of information outside the RTI regime, the SHANTI Bill risks normalising secrecy by notification rather than exception — a shift with implications beyond the nuclear sector.
What to note for Prelims?
- Key features of the Right to Information Act, 2005
- Public interest override under Section 8(2) of RTI
- Secrecy provisions under the Atomic Energy Act, 1962
- Role of statutory appeals in the RTI framework
What to note for Mains?
- Tension between national security and transparency in sensitive sectors
- How absolute secrecy provisions affect accountability
- Implications of excluding RTI oversight in regulatory governance
- Balancing nuclear safety, private participation, and democratic scrutiny
