chri executive summary 2003: looking for the right to information in ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

y 0.5 to 1.0 percentage points per year. It is not coincidental that countries with themost corrupt governments also have the lowest levels of development. The harmfuleffects of corruption are especially severe on the poor, who are least capable of payingthe extra costs associated with bribery and fraud, or surviving the embezzlement ofscarce public resources.Research shows however, that countries with access to information laws are alsoperceived to be the least corrupt. In 2002, of the ten countries scoring best inTransparency International’s annual Corruption Perceptions Index, no fewer than eighthad effective legislation enabling the public to see government files. Of the ten countriesperceived to be the worst when it comes to corruption, not even one had a functioningaccess to information regime. 4 Open government is the antidote to corruption. Theright to access information acts as a source of light which can be shone on the murkydeals and shady transactions that litter corrupt bureaucracies. Knowing that citizenscan scrutinise their actions should make governments more inclined to serve theircitizens and less inclined to swindle them.The right to information enables citizens and non-governmentorganisations to peel back the layers of bureaucratic red tape andOpen government is thepolitical sleight of hand and get to the ‘hard facts’. This knowledge,antidote to corruption.based on tangible evidence, gives people the confidence to take onpowerful interests on the basis of sound information rather than simplyThe right to accesstheoretical suppositions and vague assumptions. Armed with information,information acts as aeven the most marginalised of citizens can take action in their owninterests. For example, a daily wage earner can ask to see work registerssource of light which canto check if they are being paid what a contractor is claiming on theirbe shone on the murkybehalf from the government. A mother can challenge the basis on whichschool admission is given. A pensioner can check if personal recordsdeals and shadyheld by government are accurate or misinterpret their entitlements.transactions that litterA small business can sue for compensation if it discovers that a losttender was corruptly awarded to another bidder. A citizen’s group cancorrupt bureaucracies.lobby to stop a development project because they can access documentsthat indicate that it will have a detrimental impact on the environment.With assured sources of true information available, the media can alsoplay its watchdog role with accuracy and balance. In all, the guarantee of a right toinformation recognises that the power wielded by governments and officialsis disproportionately strengthened by its control over all information, and attemptsto redress this imbalance of power by moving the locus of authority back from thestate to the citizen.Openness and information sharing also contribute to national stability by establishinga two-way dialogue between citizens and the state. Over the years, instability andconflict have resulted in huge setbacks to development in the Commonwealth. Systemsthat encourage communication and give people the ability to personally scrutinisegovernment decision-making processes contribute to stability by reducing citizens’feelings of powerlessness, and weakening perceptions of exclusion from opportunity orunfair advantage of one group over another. It effectively reduces the distance betweengovernment and people and combats feelings of alienation.10CHRI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2003: LOOKING FOR THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION IN THE COMMONWEALTH
The Commonwealth Has Recognised the Value of the Right to InformationTo its credit, the Commonwealth has recognised the fundamental importance of theright to access information on a number of occasions. As far back as 1980, theCommonwealth Law Ministers declared that “public participation in the democraticand governmental process was at its most meaningful when citizens had adequateaccess to official information.” 5 Collective policy statements since then have encouragedmember countries to “regard freedom of information as a legal and enforceable right.” 6The Commonwealth Secretariat has even prepared guidelines 7 and a model law 8 onthe subject.But the Commonwealth Remains ClosedThere should be no need to recall the importance of the right to information to thegovernments of the Commonwealth. Yet there is. Despite strong commitments toopenness and transparency, the Official Commonwealth itself has failed to lead memberstates by example in the area of information sharing. Unlike other multilateral bodiessuch as the UNDP and the European Union, the Commonwealth Secretariat does nothave a comprehensive disclosure policy in place – other than a rule requiring releaseof certain documents after thirty years. Despite some welcome good practice at recentmeetings of its officials, the Official Commonwealth continues to hesitate to engagecivil society in its working or functions.Open government is notoriously absent in the majority of Commonwealth memberstates, and citizens suffer as a result. Only 11 out of 54 Commonwealth countries haveaccess to information laws. Many Commonwealth countries actually have guaranteesof the right to information enshrined in their constitutions (usually as part of the right tofreedom of speech and expression, rather than as a separate right). However, only ahandful have actually practically implemented the constitutional guarantee of freedomof information through enabling legislation.Member States Continue To Resist Opening UpAcross the Commonwealth, governments and bureaucracies remain reluctant to releasetheir people from the shackles of secrecy. The assumption that information is secret hasalways been a major premise of the relationship between ruler and ruled in theCommonwealth. Traditional governance structures often positioned chieftains and triballeaders as the unaccountable arbiters of their people’s governance. Colonial authorities,which owed no duty to subject populations, purposefully used secrecy to signal theirpower and distance. A culture of secrecy permeated government, and systems to keepinformation from the public became embedded. Today, except in a handful of countries,governments enthusiastically retain and indeed embrace these symbols of supremacyas if there has been no intervening change from colonial to constitutional governance.Official secrets acts, preventive detention and anti-terrorist legislation, criminaldefamation laws, overly indulgent contempt and privilege laws, media and privacyregulations and restrictive civil service rules all remain very much intact. In truth, somany laws that protect and enshrine secrecy have been accumulated that bureaucratsnow often just play it safe and simply keep every piece of paper confidential. In Kenya,for example, a file full of nothing more than newspaper cuttings was observed asmarked “very confidential” and access to it denied without the permission of thepermanent secretary!CHRI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2003: LOOKING FOR THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION IN THE COMMONWEALTH11
Page 1 and 2: CHRI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2003: LOOKIN
Page 3: Open Sesame: Looking for the Right
Page 6: Chapter SummariesThe Commonwealth H
Page 9: open up. In one extreme case, even
Page 13 and 14: in health spending are; how governm
Page 15 and 16: 1994. In India too, the national la
Page 17 and 18: RecommendationsIn the new millenniu
Page 19: CHRI ProgrammesCHRI’s work is bas

chri executive summary 2003: looking for the right to information in ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?