The Right To Know

To citizens of Western democracies, it might be puzzling that governments of Third World States are not always pleased to pass Freedom-of- information legislation. Often, governments are in no hurry to actually Implement that freedom for their people to know details of even public business.  Here are my views first expressed four years ago.  

Admittedly – perhaps regrettably – I did not pay much attention, or interest, when the issue of Freedom-of-information legislation gained a degree of national momentum  two years ago.

Well, I had occasion – and good reason – to correct my lapse just a few days ago.  The issue resonated amongst participants at a Media and Parliament Workshop, with robust vigour.  Naturally, the national media highlighted the issue through its print and electronic outlets.  What with the sentiments, the emotive  elements and the vast array of  implications  arising from the debate, I, a former Government Chief Information Officer,  a Public Relations “practitioner” and one on the periphery of journalism, just had to be interested  – somewhat intimately.

So far the layman, now justifiably pre-occupied with the daily challenges of living in this land, I will now present aspects of the subject.  Hopefully in such a manner that will help the most indifferent of citizens to appreciate how the Freedom of Information law will eventually influence personal activity and lives – and national interest and behavior.  We’re all never too old to learn.  Right?  

FOI – WHAT AND WHY

But what is this “Freedom of Information” actually all about?  Essentially, and simply, it is call for legislation to institutionalize – by definition, direction, regulation, conditions and enforcement – citizens’ right  to know!

A little long-winded?  And to know what?  Whatever Party you voted for last time, the fact remains that as a citizen of the Republic, you have to know just what the government and its state institutions are doing in your name and on your behalf –  the latter sometimes, allegedly.  As the recent Workshop – in the majority – argued:  if the public must know and participate in decisions that will affect their lives, they must enjoy an enforced right to know –  to know facts and figures, conditions of certain contracts, statistics  and their meanings related to population, investments, budgetary allocations, about their representatives’ public earnings, taxes, assets, how the national patrimony is being managed.   Oh man, the list is long.  But why is the right  important?  When food, fuel and medicines, recreation and education, are more personal priorities and concerns?

Information, like knowledge, is  power and the right to access it, either from government or private sources, is now so treasured by free thinking citizens that officialdom with nothing to fear or hide has guaranteed access by legislation.  In fact, many of societies   stakeholders – from individual citizens, whether farmer, entrepreneur or attorney to representative groups, now grasp fully the value of this civil right, the freedom of information.  For “ the fundamental premise… is that governments, for example, hold information not for themselves, but as a service for the people.   Those citizens therefore have a democratic right to access that information”.  Given a few exceptions and/or conditions.

Currently, concerned citizens here are interested in just  why, what and how government is conducting the business of managing  national assets.  All very valid and justifiable  requests to know certain information.  Access to information  is fundamental to transparency and accountability.   Information invites scrutiny.  Scrutiny stymies corruption.  In some genuine democratic societies corruption’s exposure  removes officials.    And brings down governments!   Little wonder some government takes time, much time to guarantee freedom of information by legislation.  Non-justiciable Constitutional Statements of Intent have to do for some weary populations.

**********
 
EXCEPTIONS, PRIVACY…

NATURALLY, A GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSIBILITY TO OUR  sovereignty;  its duty to protect and defend the integrity of the Stare, as well as the individual right to  privacy, which is not destabilizing or offensive to the Greater Good, must also be guaranteed.  Freedom of Information law must therefore accommodate “A regime of legitimate exceptions”.

I’ll return to this issue frequently.  I admit to being late in terms of advocating  the fearlessness and maturity for those in the Corridors of Power to enact this legislation.  Now, aware as I am of the  explanations, reasons and excuses proffered for the time being taken “to get there”,  I know too how far we as  citizens should be guaranteed answers to questions about  tender and bidding, the strength of the GDF, how many doctors taxpayers employ, the profits of public utilities, who leases our forests, when casinos’ licences are granted and the rainfall figures.

I’ll understand if I can’t be told when the police will  launch surprise raids.  I don’t want the right to know my Member of Parliament’s Bedroom affairs  or his latest medical complaint. But I should know the state of his  Tax Payments as a public representative.  Much, much more to come but I hope I’ve captured your FOI interest.