Information Disclosure Policy: A Toolkit for Pacific Governments (July 2006)
### THE VALUE OF INFORMATION DISCLOSURE Information is a public good like clean air and drinking water. It belongs not to the state, the government of the day or civil servants, but to the public. Officials create information for the benefit of the public they serve, as part of the legitimate and routine discharge of their official duties. Information is generated with public money by public servants paid out of public funds. In this interconnected information age, the combination of technology and easy availability of know-how - coupled with guaranteed access to information - offers unprecedented opportunities to develop innovative strategies for tackling the governance and development challenges faced by so many Pacific island countries. Shared equitably and managed to the best advantage of all, information offers a short cut to development and democracy. Supporting sustainable development Many Pacific island governments focus considerable resources on development programmes intended to improve the welfare of their constituents. Nonetheless, in 2006 five countries in the Pacific are still characterised as Least Developed Countries by the United Nations.11 One of the reasons why so many development strategies in the Pacific Islands have made limited progress is that, for years, they have been designed and implemented in a closed environment - between governments and donors and without the active involvement of the public. This can result in strict policy prescriptions in their wakerather than a practical and inclusive approach to implementation. Poor people and women in particular are often completely excluded from development decision-making processes and only learn about projects supposed to benefit them after they have been signed off. Troublingly, even elected parliamentarians have sometimes complained that they are kept out of the policy loop and struggle to access information about development plans and donor budgets. Too often, development projects are designed by foreign experts with little Pacific experience. Practical realities mean that they are nonetheless usually endorsed by local governments who are told that aid funding is conditional on their implementation. Troublingly, even elected parliamentarians have sometimes complained that they are kept out of the policy loop and struggle to access information about development plans and donor budgets. In this context, poor people and women in particular are often completely excluded from development decision-making processes and only learn about projects supposed to benefit them after they have been signed off.
Information empowers citizens and NGOs The right to access information offers a very practical means for individuals, civil society and even parliamentarians to engage more effectively in development activities and ensure that their rights are protected and their legitimate interests promoted. This has been particularly well-illustrated by environmental action groups which have been very adept at using access to information legislation to expose and discourage anti-green government and/or donor-driven and/or private sector driven programmes. For example, in 2002 in Uganda, Greenwatch Limited, an environmental NGO, used the open government clause in Article 41 of the Ugandan Constitution to obtain the release of a key document about a controversial dam project that the Ugandan government and the World Bank had previously declined to release. The Ugandan High Court ordered the release of the document, whose very existence the Ugandan Government had denied during the court proceedings. A subsequent analysis of the document, commissioned by the International Rivers Network assessed that "Ugandans will pay hundreds of millions of dollars in excessive power payments if the World-Bank-financed Bujagali Dam proceeds according to plan." The project was consequently put on hold by the World Bank.12
With assured access to information, local parliamentarians and beneficiaries will be given a powerful tool to engage with development processes being directed at them. The World Bank has specifically acknowledged that: "The sharing of information is essential for sustainable development. It stimulates public debate on and broadens understanding of development issues, and enhances transparency and accountability in the development process. It also strengthens public support for efforts to improve the lives of people in developing countries, facilitates collaboration among the many parties involved in development, and improves the quality of assistance projects and programs."13 If governments promote the provision of development information to the public - for example, information about proposed new projects, an explanation of how programmes are being designed and implemented, details of anticipated beneficiaries, and/or information about the implementation of current activities - citizens can more effectively engage with their own development. With more information, affected communities can meaningfully participate with governments to develop targeted, sustainable programmes which are genuinely owned by local beneficiaries. Encouraging equitable economic growth Markets, like governments, do not function well in secret. Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize winning ex-Chief Economist of the World Bank, has consistently argued that greater transparency and information sharing between governments, business and citizens produces improvements in market efficiencies and public policy.14 Of the thirty countries that are members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), only three have not passed access to information laws. Information disclosure lays the foundation for market-friendly good governance principles of transparency and accountability, which in turn encourage growth. More government openness also supports more efficient economic outcomes because "a case can be made that the heightened transparency that leads to better prices for government procurement [which] translates into better value for taxpayers' money".15 A transparent government committed to information disclosure will provide good-quality economic and social data proactively which will better inform government economic policy and decision-making. In recent years, Pacific Island states have struggled to attract significant levels of foreign investment in order to accelerate economic growth and development, even though many countries are heavily reliant on remittances from citizens working abroad. Easy access to fulsome information that is not mired in bureaucratic processes encourages long-term investor confidence as well as making it easier for Pacific citizens overseas to engage in economic development activities at home. Foreign and local investors need to be able to rely on the routine availability of timely and accurate information about government policies, the operation of regulatory authorities and financial institutions and the criteria used to award tenders, provide licences and give credit. Conversely, investors are reluctant to make commitments if they do not know what the rules are or if they are not confident that the rules will be applied fairly and consistently. Not merely economic growth, but also economic equity is promoted by access to information. By empowering smaller stakeholders to more effectively participate in the economy, the right to information can also help to ensure the economy grows more fairly. Liberating information from government increases economic opportunity for the less powerful, as much as for the big player. For example, communities who want to develop their natural resources can access information which will help them better assess their options and more effectively negotiate fairer deals with private companies. A worker can access information about labour regulations and their entitlements, a businessperson can find out about licensing, taxation and trade regulations; and farmers can get hold of land records, market trend analysis and pricing information. Supporting decentralisation efforts The free flow of information between different levels of government, and between governments and the public promotes better decentralised governance and more effective service delivery, in particular by facilitating more informed participation by communities in the operation and oversight of services. A number of Pacific Islands countries have chosen to pursue devolution or decentralisation strategies, but continue to face difficulties. Local level corruption has been a problem and effective public participation is often still lacking. There is often considerable confusion, among communities and within government, over which level of government is responsible for providing what public services. This has weakened accountability mechanisms. More active dissemination of information by all levels of government can address some of the practical problems of decentralisation, by making public more information about what governments do and who does what. In terms of service delivery specifically, information about how much money is to be spent on a community, what the money is to be spent on, over what period of time and by which department(s) could be disseminated. With this information, the public will then know who to talk to about services they need and programmes they want to be involved in. Information disclosure opens up communication channels between governments and remote communities, giving locals real power over decisions that affect their lives.
Promoting more effective service delivery through information disclosure In Uganda, despite massive increases in education expenditure during the 1990s, a five-year survey found that 87% of all funds meant for primary schools were being diverted. Shocked by the findings, the national government began to publicise details of monthly transfers of grants to districts through newspapers and the radio. Primary schools were also required to display public notices on receipt of their funds. Empowered with this information, parents were able to monitor education grants and make local governments accountable for education provision. In five years, the diversion of funds dropped massively from over 80% to around 20%, while enrolment more than doubled from 3.6 million to 6.9 million children. In this way, proactive disclosure of information about education funding - a simple and inexpensive strategy - enforced greater local government accountability and the proper use of taxpayers' money.16
Improving efficiency of public administration Open government support by information disclosure promotes more efficient and effective functioning of public administration. In many Pacific island countries, administrative inefficiencies continue to undermine public trust in the state and have hindered economic and social development. In particular, poor administration often weakens efforts at poverty reduction, creating a vicious circle where ineffective management leads to the leakage of funds, which, in turn, deters crucial foreign investment and donor support. A good information regime often operates to make administrative procedures more transparent at all levels of government. In practice, this can encourage implementing agencies to be more efficient because they will be aware that oversight agencies and even the public can review their activities and will be able to find out about poor planning or implementation of activities. Leakage of resources from government activities will also be harder to hide. Openness also encourages better policy-making, as officials work harder to ensure that their decisions and policy approaches can withstand public scrutiny.
Promoting more effective administration of government schemes17 In India, poor citizens are given a ration card which entitles them to discounted rice and wheat. Similar government welfare programmes are found in the Pacific. In the jurisdiction of Delhi, citizens used their right to information law to access records held by the private ration shop dealers responsible for administering the programme and found that the shops' owners had been siphoning off more than 90% of the rations, while providing false records to the Government Food Department. Citizens accessed government records and compared them to the entries in their own ration books. Comparisons showed that the Government's records contained widespread false entries. Following a long NGO campaign, the Delhi Government has now agreed to open up ration registers every month to enable citizens to regularly check their ration records. This is resulting in savings to the Government, as the Food Department is now directing its limited budget more effectively.
Entrenching participatory democracy The foundation of democracy is an informed constituency that is able to thoughtfully choose its representatives on the basis of the strength of their record and one that can hold government officials accountable for their policies and decisions. Democracy is enhanced when people meaningfully engage with their institutions of governance and form their judgments on the basis of facts and evidence, rather than just empty promises and political slogans. Where people do not have access to information, voters often fall back on ethnic, religious or geographic affiliations when choosing a candidate. Information disclosure plays a crucial role in ensuring that citizens are better informed about the people they are electing and their activities while in government. In the absence of a continuous flow of information that accurately reveals how ministries are functioning, how politicians have performed or the experience and qualifications of new candidates, elections can end up promoting only narrow interests or not recognising the very real achievements of parliamentary representatives. Likewise, where it is difficult to scrutinise the financial details of political party funding, citizens are unable to ensure that special interest groups, including criminal elements, do not co-opt their representatives for private gain. Better-informed voters mean better-informed choices, better legislators and better governance.
Knowing who you are really voting for18 As in many countries, Indian law disqualifies people convicted of serious criminal offences from standing for elections but does not bar those indicted and awaiting trial or in appeal. Alarmed by the number of people with questionable backgrounds entering parliament, a group of enterprising academics applied to the Supreme Court to direct India's Election Commission to make it compulsory for candidates to disclose any charges of serious crimes pending against them. The Supreme Court agreed, finding that the right to information is inherent to democracy and that voters have a constitutional right to know a candidate's background. The Commission immediately made the necessary changes to the nomination process. Despite some legal challenges, all candidates in Indian elections, at the time of nominations, must file an affidavit disclosing if they have been charged with serious crimes, their educational qualifications and the extent of their wealth and liabilities. This information must be made widely available.
Strengthening responsible media reporting In robust democracies, the media have an important role to play as an effective means of communicating key messages and information to the public. The media is the foremost means of distributing information; where illiteracy is widespread, radio and television have become vital communication links. The media can act as a two-way communication mechanism, reporting to communities on government business and activities and feeding back to the centres of power the issues that are important to villages and communities. In this capacity, the media also often acts as a watchdog, scrutinising official activities and exposing mismanagement. Journalists have a duty to report the facts to the public in a fair and balanced way, without fear or favour. However, where the media is hemmed in by regulation or is unable to get reliable information held by governments and other powerful interests, it cannot fulfil its role effectively. Lack of access to information leaves reporters reliant on rumour and half-truths instead of facts. Conversely, a sound access regime provides a framework within which the media can seek, receive and impart essential information accurately and is therefore in the interests of governments as well as the public. Many MPs in the Pacific have raised concerns about how the media might use information which they have accessed from government. They fear that implementing a disclosure regime could lead to frivolous or contentious requests from the media, and irresponsible reporting. However, at a 2005 Pacific Workshop for MPs on Freedom of Information, Pacific MPs endorsed a statement which recognised among other things, that: A freedom of information system can help improve the level of public debate and media reporting in a country by making more facts available to the public, and therefore reducing the risk of debate and reporting being based mostly on rumours and unverifiable allegations.19 Reducing conflict by cementing public trust Democracy and national stability are enhanced by policies of openness which engender greater public trust in government. Systems that enable people to be part of, and personally scrutinise, decision-making processes reduce citizens' feelings of powerlessness and weakens perceptions of exclusion or unfair advantage of one group over another. Importantly, enhancing people's trust in their official representatives also goes some way to minimising the likelihood of conflict. In post-conflict development situations such as that underway in the Solomon Islands, the right to information can be especially crucial in the state-building process because openness and information-sharing contribute to national stability by establishing a two-way dialogue between citizens and the state, reducing distance between government and people and thereby combating feelings of alienation Supporting human rights The right to information has been recognised by the United Nations General Assembly as far back as 1946, when it declared "Freedom of Information is a fundamental human right and the touchstone for all freedoms to which the United Nations is consecrated"20. For example, freedom of expression and thought inherently rely on the availability of adequate information to inform opinions. The realisation of the right to personal safety also requires that people have sufficient information to protect themselves. Lack of information denies people the opportunity to develop their potential to the fullest and realise the full range of their human rights. The right to information was given international legal status when it was enshrined in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.21 Over time, the right to information has been included in a number of regional human rights instruments, including the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights,22 the American Convention on Human Rights23 and the European Charter of Human Rights.24 This has placed the right to information firmly within the body of universal human rights law. Notably, the Pacific is one of the only regions in the world which does not have its own regional charter of human rights. 11UNDP (2006) Governance for the Future: Democracy and Development in Least Developed Countries. 12Ugandan Judge Orders Release of Key Document on Bujagali Dam, 22 November 2002, http://www.freedominfo.org/ifti1102.htm#1 as at 22 July 2003. 13World Bank, op cit, Foreword by Mr James D Wolfensohn, President of the World Bank. 14Stiglitz, J. (1999) "On Liberty, the Right to Know, and Public Discourse: The Role of Transparency in Public Life", Oxford Amnesty Lecture, 27 January. 15Macdonell, R. (2004) "Access to Information - The Commercial Side", Development Outreach, World Bank Institute, http://www1.worldbank.org/devoutreach/article.asp?id=196. 16World Bank (2001) World Development Report 2000-01: Attacking Poverty, Oxford University Press, NY. 17Staff reporter (2005) "Look, How Fair Price Shops Clean Up Act", Indian Express, 24 February. See http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=118913. 18Daruwala, M., Mohapatra, B. & Nayak, V. (2003) The Right to Know: A Voter's Guide, CHRI and VANI, New Delhi. 19CPA& CHRI (2005) Freedom of Information in the Pacific: Report of a CPA/CHRI Regional Workshop, http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/programs/ai/rti/news/2006/pacific_mps_wkshp_foi_booklet_jan06.pdf. 20See UN General Assembly Resolution 59(1), 65th Plenary Meeting, 1946. 21This states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ides through any media and regardless of frontiers." [emphasis added] 22See A Right to Information, Article 9(1), African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982), 27 June 1981. 23See A Right to Information, Article 13(1), American Convention on Human Rights, 1969, Costa Rica, OAS Treaty Series No. 36, 1144 U.N.T.S. 123. 24See A Right to Information, Article 11(1), Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2000, Nice, Official Journal of the European Communities, C 364/1.
Commissioned by the Pacific Media and Communications Facility, an Australian Government, AusAID initiative managed by MDI International in association with MC Media & Associates