The Tamil Nadu government has issued an official order exempting the law and order wing of its Public Department from the Right to Information (RTI) Act, significantly restricting public access to a wide range of records covering policing, protests, custodial matters, and internal security. The move, effective from 27 September 2026, designates the wing as an organisation engaged in intelligence and security work — a classification that provides a statutory basis for rejecting routine RTI requests.

What Records Are Now Out of Reach

The exemption covers a sweeping range of documents previously accessible under the RTI framework. These include papers related to the appointment of commissions of inquiry into law and order incidents, communal and caste clashes, police arrests and custody, and deaths of prisoners. Records of police investigation reports received by the department also fall under the restriction.

Additionally, minutes and materials from monthly law and order review meetings held on the Chief Secretary's instructions — as well as special meetings convened to handle specific situations of unrest — are now shielded. Even records prepared for answering law and order questions in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha are covered, as are documents relating to demonstrations by students, farmers and political party workers, and allegedly defamatory articles, news clippings and speeches scrutinised by the wing.

Legal Basis and Stated Justification

The Tamil Nadu government's stated position is that information relating to law and order cannot be made available to the public without restriction. Under Section 24(4) of the RTI Act, a state government is permitted to exempt an intelligence or security organisation through a gazette notification. The wing's redesignation as an intelligence and security body provides the legal basis for the blanket exemption. Crucially, the notification must be laid before the state legislature as required by law.

Key Safeguards That Remain

Notably, the exemption is not absolute. The RTI Act's own provisions carve out two critical exceptions: information pertaining to allegations of corruption, and records concerning human rights violations, cannot be withheld on the basis of this exemption alone. RTI requests involving alleged human rights violations will require the State Information Commission's approval and must be addressed within the statutory timeframe.

This means applicants seeking information about custodial deaths or police misconduct may still invoke the human rights provisions of the Act — though they will face additional procedural hurdles. The scope and application of the notification are therefore likely to become contested terrain as individual cases are decided.

Concerns and Wider Context

The decision has drawn scrutiny from transparency advocates, who argue that the law and order wing's work — particularly its oversight of public protests, communal incidents and custody — is precisely the kind of government activity that demands public accountability. Critics argue that classifying a broad administrative wing as an intelligence body risks conflating routine policing paperwork with genuinely sensitive security intelligence.

This is not the first time a state government has used Section 24 exemptions to limit RTI access to law enforcement-related records. Several other states have previously notified police intelligence units under similar provisions, though the scope of Tamil Nadu's order — extending to parliamentary question materials and records of public demonstrations — is considered notably wide by transparency practitioners.

The practical effect will ultimately hinge on how individual RTI officers within the wing interpret and apply the order, and whether the State Information Commission takes a narrow or expansive view of what constitutes a human rights violation when disputed requests come before it.