|
What
is the Right to Information?
The Right to Information
is a Fundamental Human Right
The
Right to Information is the key to Democracy and Development
-
Making participatory
democracy meaningful
- Cementing Trust
In Government
- Supporting People-Centred
Development
- Facilitating Equitable
Economic Growth
- Tackling Corruption
- Bolstering Media
Capacity
This is the age of information affluence. Technology,
with its capacity for storing, simplifying and communicating information
with astonishing speed has, more than ever, put information at the
centre of development. Information is a global resource of unlimited
potential for all.
Importantly, information belongs not to the state,
the government of the day or civil servants, but to the public.
Officials do not create information for their own benefit alone,
but for the benefit of the public they serve, as part of the legitimate
and routine discharge of the government’s duties. Information is
generated with public money by public servants paid out of public
funds. Therefore, it cannot be unreasonably kept from citizens.
The Right to Information is a Fundamental Human
Right
Lack
of information denies people the opportunity to develop their potential
to the fullest and realise the full range of their human rights.
Individual personality, political and social identity and economic
capability are all shaped by the information that is available to
each person and to society at large. The practice of routinely holding
information away from the public creates ‘subjects’ rather than
‘citizens’ and is a violation of their rights. This was recognised
by the United Nations at its very inception in 1946, when the General
Assembly resolved: “Freedom of Information
is a fundamental human right and the touchstone for all freedoms
to which the United Nations is consecrated”
[1].
Enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, the right’s status as a legally binding treaty obligation
was affirmed in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights which 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 ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”
[2].
This has placed the right to access information firmly
within the body of universal human rights law.
The
right to access information underpins all other human rights. 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. In Canada, a court has recognised
that the right to security creates a corollary right to information
about threats to personal safety which would be violated if the
police force knew of a threat and failed to provide that information
to the threatened individual.
[3].
The right to food is also often
reliant on the right to information. In India for example, people
have used access laws to find out about their ration entitlements
and to expose the fraudulent distribution of food grains.
[4]
Quite simply, the right to information is at
the core of the human rights system because it enables citizens
to more meaningfully exercise their rights, assess when their rights
are at risk and determine who is responsible for any violations.
It is important that access to information is
recognised as a right because it:
-
Accords it sufficient importance, as being
inherent to democratic functioning and a pre-condition to good
governance and the realisation of all other human rights.
-
Becomes part of the accepted international
obligations of the state. This means that the right to access
information attracts the guarantee of protection by
the state.
-
Distances it from being merely an administrative
measure by which information is gifted by governments to their
people at their discretion since a legally enforceable right
cannot be narrowed or ignored at the whim of government.
-
Creates a duty-holder on the one hand and
a beneficiary of a legal entitlement on the other. Non-disclosure
of information is therefore a violation and the beneficiary
can seek legal remedy.
-
Signals that information belongs to the public
and not government. The idea that everything is secret unless
there is a strong reason for releasing it is replaced by the
idea that all information is available unless there are strong
reasons for denying it. The onus is on the duty-holder to prove
its case for refusing to disclose documents.
-
Sets a higher standard of accountability.
-
Gives citizens the legal power to attack
the legal and institutional impediments to openness and accountability
that still dominate the operations of many governments. It moves
the locus of control from the state to the citizen, reinstating
the citizen as sovereign.
The
right to information holds within it the right to seek information,
as well as the duty to give information, to store, organise, and
make it easily available, and to withhold it only when it is proven
that this is in the best public interest. The duty to enable access
to information rests with government and encompasses two key aspects:
enabling citizens to access information upon request; and proactively
disseminating important information.
[5]
|
When is private…public?
In
a world where non-state actors – such as public or private
corporations, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), quasi
non-government organisations and international institutions
– influence the destinies of millions, the ambit of the
right to information needs to encompass more than just
governments. Some Commonwealth countries have extended
the coverage of their laws to some private bodies
[6]
, recognising that the issue needs to be “resolved
by reference to its role in protecting the fundamental
interests of citizens, and not by reference to the provenance
or structural characteristics of the institution holding
the contested information.”
[7]
As more and more public functions,
like provision of health care, supply of water, power
and transport, and even prison management, are privatised,
people need to be able to get information from the bodies
performing these services. Often, agreements between government
and service providers do not require them to make information
about their activities available. This removes information
from the public domain that would otherwise have been
covered under access laws. Even where private bodies are
not providing public services, their activities need to
be open to public scrutiny if they affect people’s rights.
For example, the public should be able to access information
on a factory’s environmental management policies to ensure
the factory is managing toxic waste appropriately and
therefore, not diminishing their right to health.
|
[Go
Top]
The Right to Information is the key to Democracy
and Development
The
reluctance of so many member countries to enshrine the right to
access information is surprising considering open government offers
the key to deepening democracy and quickening development that the
Commonwealth is so desperately seeking. The right to information
lays the foundation upon which to build good governance, transparency,
accountability and participation, and to eliminate that scourge
upon the poor – corruption. As such, it should be embraced as much
by the hard-headed economist as by the high-minded reformer.
[Go
Top]
Making
participatory democracy meaningful
To
be a member of the Commonwealth, a country must comply with the
values and principles set out in the 1991 Harare Declaration, which
recognises “the individual's inalienable right to participate by
means of free and democratic political processes in framing the
society in which he or she lives.”
[8]
While all members of the Commonwealth have made that
commitment to democracy, in many countries the democratic principles
of good governance, transparency and accountability are largely
absent. The fact is that periodic elections and a functioning bureaucracy
do not in themselves ensure that governments are responsive and
inclusive. Something more is needed. Access to information is the
key for moving from formal to consultative and responsive democracy.
In 2002, the Commonwealth Law Ministers specifically recognise that
“the right to access information was an important aspect of democratic
accountability and promoted transparency and encouraged full participation
of citizens in the democratic process”
[9]
.
Information
is often withheld even when people are engaged in exercising that
most basic of democratic rights, the vote. 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 may end up promoting only narrow interests
as voters fall back on tribal, clan, religious or class affiliations
as the basis for their choice. Likewise, in the absence of a right
to scrutinise the financial details of political party funding –
some of it no more than bribes – 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, more responsive legislators
and better governance.
[Go
Top]
Cementing
Trust In Government
Democracy and national stability are enhanced by policies of openness
which engender greater public trust in their representatives. This
is a crucial aspect of effective governance – without the support
and trust of the people, governments will be more likely to face
resistance to their policies and programs and implementation will
be more difficult. A Commonwealth Foundation study in 1999 which
sought the views of some 10,000 citizens in over 47 Commonwealth
countries has shown that there is a growing disillusionment
of citizens with their governments: “Citizens are suspicious of
the motives and intentions of their governments. They feel ignored
or even betrayed by their elected representatives. Indeed, they
feel suspicious of the very programmes and agencies created to meet
the needs they have. They feel neglected, ignored and uncared for.”
[10]
The integrity of governments
needs to improve – and be seen to improve.
Open government and access to information provide a means of achieving
both these ends.
Over
the years, instability and conflict have resulted in huge setbacks
to development in the Commonwealth. Enhancing people’s trust in
their government goes some way to minimising the likelihood of conflict.
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. Systems that enable people to be part of,
and personally scrutinise, decision-making processes reduce citizens’
feelings of powerlessness and weaken perceptions of exclusion from
opportunity or unfair advantage of one group over another.
[Go
Top]
Supporting
People-Centred Development
At
the turn of the century, all members of the Commonwealth came together
in their broader membership of the United Nations and pledged their
commitment to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) – the most
comprehensive poverty reduction and development agenda the international
community has ever forged. At Coolum in 2002, the Commonwealth Heads
of Government made a commitment “to work to eliminate poverty, to
promote people-centred and sustainable development, and thus progressively
to remove the wide disparities in living standards among us”
[11]
. Sadly, in 2003, poverty remains the hallmark of the
Commonwealth. Almost two thirds of the people living in the Commonwealth
still live on less than $2 a day.
[12]
Half of the 130 million children in the world who do
not have access to primary education live in the Commonwealth.
[13]
Sixty per cent of HIV/AIDS cases worldwide are found
in the Commonwealth.
[14]
Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia (home to more than
85% of the Commonwealth) have within them the largest concentrations
of hungry people in the world.
[15]
With just seven years to go to reach the MDG targets,
many countries are slipping far behind schedule.
The
sad fact is that while poor people throughout the Commonwealth have
strong views on their own development destinies
[16]
, they remain excluded. Tragically, this has resulted
in governments taking advantage of the marginalised populations
they should be helping. For example, from the Pacific to Africa
to South Asia, the rural poor and indigenous communities who are
so heavily reliant on their local natural resources for survival
have often been excluded from decisions about their use and
sale which have been made by governments dominated by the urban
elite who have then co-opted the benefits. Likewise,
women, who battle discrimination across the Commonwealth,
continue to be ignored and their contribution to development undervalued.
With assured information, marginalised
groups will be given their rightful voice and a powerful tool to
scrutinise and engage with the development processes
being directed at them.
Much
of the failure of poverty reduction and development strategies to
date can be attributed to the fact that, for years, they have been
designed behind closed doors by governments who consulted with ‘experts’
but shut out the very people who were supposed to benefit. Even
a parliamentarian in Ghana complained that the interim Poverty Reduction
Strategy Paper required by the World Bank, as well as crucial decisions
to take advantage of the Highly Indebted Poor Country Initiative
which will affect government policy directions for years to come,
were not referred to Parliament at large.
[17]
Donors have been complicit in keeping development planning
processes closed. Multilateral institutions, such as the World Bank
and the International Monetary Fund, are now beginning to open up
following pressure from civil society groups, but much more work
still needs to be done.
[Go
Top]
Facilitating
Equitable Economic Growth
The
Commonwealth is relying on free markets to quicken development.
But markets, like governments, do not function well in secret. Openness
encourages a political and economic environment more conducive to
the free market tenets of ‘perfect information’ and ‘perfect competition’.
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. Easy access to fulsome information that is not
mired in bureaucratic processes creates long-term investor confidence
in the local economic environment. A guaranteed right to information
lays the foundation for market-friendly good governance principles
of transparency and accountability, which in turn encourage strong
growth.
Not
merely economic growth, but also economic equity is promoted by
access to information. At Coolum in 2002, the Commonwealth called
on governments to “work to reduce the growing gap between rich and
poor” and declared that “the benefits of globalisation must be shared
more widely and its focus channelled for the elimination of poverty
and human deprivation.”
[18]
The liberation from government of information that would
otherwise have remained unutilised increases economic opportunity
for the less powerful as much as for the big player. A worker
can access information about labour regulations and their entitlements,
a businessperson can find out about licensing requirements, taxation
and trade regulations; and farmers can get hold of land records,
market trend analysis and pricing information.
[Go
Top]
Tackling
Corruption
A
guaranteed right to access information is an essential and practical
antidote to corruption, which is rife in too many Commonwealth countries.
Corruption is destroying the rule of law and has created a mutually
supporting class of overlords who need secrecy to hide their dark
deeds in dark places. In the worst instances, it has led to the
‘criminalisation of politics’ and ‘the politicisation of criminals’,
turning elections into futile exercises which merely legitimise
bad governance and bad governors.
Corruption
is leaching away the economic lifeblood of many Commonwealth societies.
The World Bank estimates that corruption can reduce a country's
growth rate by 0.5 to 1.0 percentage points per year. Transparency
International estimates that over $30 billion in aid for Africa
– an amount twice the annual gross domestic product of Ghana, Kenya
and Uganda combined – has ended up in foreign bank accounts.
[19]
The need to give ‘speed money’, ‘grease’ or ‘baksheesh’
in return for public services or rightful entitlements amounts to
an additional illegal tax. Corruption is especially severe on the
poor, who are least capable of paying the extra costs associated
with bribery and fraud or surviving the embezzlement of scarce public
resources.
It
is not coincidental that countries perceived to have the most corrupt
governments also have the lowest levels of development or that countries
with access to information laws are also perceived to be the least
corrupt. In 2002, of the ten countries scoring best in Transparency
International’s annual Corruption Perceptions Index, no fewer than
eight had effective legislation enabling the public to see government
files. Of the ten countries perceived to be the worst in terms of
corruption, not even one had a functioning access to information
regime.
[20]
The right to access information acts as a source of
light to be shone on the murky deals and shady transactions that
litter corrupt governments. It enables civil society and especially
the media to peel back the layers of bureaucratic red tape and political
sleight of hand and get to the ‘hard facts.’
[Go
Top]
Bolstering
Media Capacity
In
robust democracies, the media acts as a watchdog, scrutinising the
powerful and exposing mismanagement and corruption. It is also the
foremost means of distributing information; where illiteracy is
widespread, radio and television have become vital communication
links. Unfortunately, this power to reach the masses has often been
perceived as a threat by closed governments, which have carefully
regulated private ownership of the press and attempted to curb the
media’s ability to gather news, investigate and inform. Zimbabwe’s
repeated attempts to close the independent Daily News newspaper
is an example of this sinister tendency. Satellite television and
the internet are making slow inroads, but even the content of these
are sometimes restricted.
Where
the media is unable to get reliable information held by governments
and other powerful interests, it cannot fulfil its role to the best
of its abilities. Journalists are left to depend on leaks and luck
or to rely on press releases and voluntary disclosures provided
by the very people they are seeking to investigate. Lack of access
to information also leaves reporters open to government allegations
that their stories are inaccurate and reliant on rumour and half-truths
instead of facts. A sound access regime provides a framework within
which the media can seek, receive and impart essential information
accurately and is as much in the interests of government as it is
of the people.
[Go
Top]
[1]
UN General Assembly, (1946) Resolution
59(1), 65th Plenary Meeting, December 14.
[2]
Emphasis added.
[3]
Ontario Court (General
Division), Jane Doe v. Board of Commissioners of Police for
the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto et al., Court File
No. 87-CQ-21670, Judgment July 3, 1998 cited in Roberts, A.
(2003) “Challenges to the right to information”, CHRI unpublished,
p.1.
[4]
Kejriwal, A. (2003) “More
stories of Parivartan”, India Together, April 2003: http://indiatogether.org/2003/apr/gov-rtidelhi.htm
as on 1 October 2003.
[5]
See Chapter 2 for a detailed
discussion of the parameters of effective access to information
legislation.
[6]
See Chapter 3 for a detailed
discussion.
[7]
Lewis, D. (2003) “The
Need and Value of Access to Information from Non-State Agencies”,
CHRI unpublished, p.9.
[8]
Declaration (1991), Commonwealth
Harare Declaration, Issued by Commonwealth Heads of Government,
Zimbabwe, 20 October 1991: http://www.thecommonwealth.org/whoweare/declarations/harare.html
[9]
Communiqué 02/88, Meeting
of Commonwealth Law Ministers in Kingstown, St Vincent and the
Grenadines, 18-21 November 2002, para.20, www.thecommonwealth.org/docs/communiques/News88.doc.
[10]
Commonwealth Foundation
(1999) Citizens and Governance: Civil Society in the New
Millennium, pp. 38-39, http://www.commonwealthfoundation.com/information/infosheet.cfm?id=23
as on 1 October 2003.
[11]
Declaration 02/19, (2002) The
Commonwealth in the 21st Century: Continuity and
Renewal, issued by Commonwealth Heads of Government in Coolum,
Australia, March 5: http://www.thecommonwealth.org/dynamic/press_office/display.asp?id=417&type=press&cat=53
[12]
World Bank (2001) World
Development Report 2000-01: Attacking Poverty, Oxford University
Press, New York.
[13]
Cox, W. (2001) The Role of
the Commonwealth in Poverty Reduction, address given at
the Conference on Human Rights and the Alleviation of Poverty,
Wilton Park, London.
[14]
UNDP (2002) HIV/AIDS
Statistical Fact Sheet, http://www.undp.org/hiv/docs/barcelona-statistical-fact-sheet-2July02.doc.
Nine of the worst-affected countries are members of the Commonwealth:
Botswana, Cameroon, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa,
Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
[15]
UNDP (2003) UNDP Human
Development Report 2003, Oxford University Press, New Delhi,
p.6.
[16]
See Rademacher,
A. & K.Schaftt et al. (1999) Voices of the Poor: Can
Anyone Hear Us?, Oxford University Press for the World Bank,
http://www.worldbank.org/poverty/voices/.
[17]
Globalization Challenge Initiative,
(2000) ‘Who Governs Low Income Countries: An Interview with
Charles Abugre on the Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy Initiative’,
IMF and World Bank News and Notices, Fall: www.challengeglobalization.org/html/news_notices/fall2000/fall2000-01.shtml
[18]
Declaration 02/19, (2002) The
Commonwealth in the 21st Century: Continuity and
Renewal, issued by Commonwealth Heads of Government in Coolum,
Australia, March 5: http://www.thecommonwealth.org/dynamic/press_office/display.asp?id=417&type=press&cat=53
[19]
United Nations, (2000) Tenth United Nations Congress
on the Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders, Press
Kit Backgrounder No3: http://www.un.org/events/10thcongress/2088b.htm
[20]
Ibid. See also
Transparency International, (1998) “Press Release: Eight out
of ten "clean" countries have effective freedom of
information”, http://www.transparency.org/pressreleases_archive/1998/1998.12.03.ford.html
as on 22 July 2003.

|
|