The Information Commission is attempting to resume full operations after a two-year period of inactivity. Following the appointment of the Chief Information Commissioner and two other commissioners, hearings to dispose of over 900 pending complaints are scheduled to begin this month.

The new commission is also planning outreach programs, including information fairs, to raise public awareness about the Right to Information Act. Additionally, the commission is working on setting a 100-day priority agenda.

Breaking the Deadlock

Since its establishment until December 2024, approximately 167,000 applications for information were filed. Of these, nearly 95 percent of applicants received the requested information. However, the commission remained largely non-functional over the past two years, a situation the newly constituted body is now striving to overcome.

The newly appointed commissioners are prioritizing the resolution of long-pending complaints. Hearings commencing this month are expected to clear the backlog. In parallel, initiatives such as information fairs are being organized to educate citizens about their rights under the RTI Act, alongside the formulation of a 100-day priority plan.

Context: The AI Challenge to Information Authenticity

This institutional revival coincides with a growing global concern regarding the reliability of information in the age of artificial intelligence. According to a database maintained by Damien Charlotin, a researcher at HEC Business School in Paris, 1,598 instances of AI-generated false information being used in courts worldwide have been documented as of June 9, 2026. A year earlier, that number was only 200.

Consider a scenario: a young lawyer, working late at night, asks an AI tool for legal precedents. The AI confidently provides case names, years, and excerpts of rulings, which the lawyer incorporates into a filing.

The next day, the judge asks for copies of those cases. This is a classic case of AI hallucination—the confident fabrication of false information.

The consequences can be severe. In March 2026, the U.S.

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals fined two lawyers $30,000 for submitting briefs containing such fabricated citations.

The Nature of the Risk

The language generated by AI is so polished that errors are not easily detected. This risk extends beyond the legal profession, increasingly affecting student research papers. As the Information Commission works to ensure citizens' right to information, the proliferation of AI-generated content presents a new and significant challenge to verifying the authenticity of information.