Proposed RTI ordinance proves to be an empty show
Enayet Rasul | Thursday, 21 August 2008
The Right to Information Act has been eagerly awaited in Bangladesh by all those who understand and appreciate its significance for good governance of the country. The prevailing Official Secrets Act in Bangladesh is like an impenetrable shield that denies completely the access to vital information that the people can demand to know as part of their basic or fundamental rights. The right to information is universally judged to be a basic human rights and upheld as such. There are countries, of course, which are not helping the observance of human rights or doing so only partially. But such polities are not the wave of the future.
There is now universal recognition that human rights, including the vital right to information, are central to having responsible and responsive governance leading to good governance. The right to information is also considered to have an umbilical relationship to democracy. In a democracy, people must know everything that stands to affect them so that they can voice their opinion about them or even oppose them if these are found to be against their true interests. Thus, even our subcontinental neighbours --India, Pakistan and Nepal-- are noted for catching up with universal standards. They have RTIs when Bangladesh has been conspicuously lagging behind in this area.
However, all concerned in Bangladesh were inspired by the news that the incumbent interim government would introduce a right to information act. The primary initiatives to this end seemed satisfactory. The media members who would be understandably expected to be the main user of the act in prying out information in the interest of the people, they were requested to give their suggestions. This was done in earnest by the media. But now, the final draft of the RTI act is available and the very conspicuous feature of it is its near complete disregard of the suggestions made from the media.
A media panel gave their opinion on the proposed RTI ordinance on Sunday. Members of the panel found it so deficient that they unanimously shared the view that the draft, if approved in its present form, would be absolutely unacceptable to the media. The media members were not only voicing the reactions of their own community. Members of the civil society or all enlightened sections of the population in Bangladesh who are eager for positive developments to occur, are all likely to be one in voicing similar opinion. It was remarked in the media panel that " if passed as it is now, the law will be the worst in South Asia."
It appears that the media in its previous parleys with the government on the matter suggested exemption from application of the act as few subjects as possible to make the law a meaningful one. After all, media was not so unrealistic as to recommend absolutely unfettered access to information in all areas including the ones involving high priority areas of national security. The maintenance of some secrecy in these areas may be useful for the public good. But except a few areas, the recommendations were for withdrawing exemption from disclosure in all other areas in which there are justified public interests in doing the same. Only about nine areas were agreed on the two sides where exemption from disclosure would continue. But the draft RTI ordinance has extended this exemption list from nine to twenty areas. Thus, the proposed RTI, if enacted in its existing form, will only mean largely the preserving of the status quo of not divulging vital information to people in many areas. It would be a RTI act in name only with the reality being the continuation of the culture of secrecy and denial of information to people in much the same manner as so many areas would be exempt from disclosing information under it.
Many areas of governmental activities, NGOs and even political parties would get exemption from the mandatory requirement of disclosure of information on demand under the draft ordinance. Thus, its promulgation would only add to the tally of another rather fruitless law. Hardly the present stranglehold of the Official Secrecy Act which was introduced by the British colonials as an instrument of their oppression and which is in force today, will be removed.
As has been explained by a leading journalist of the country, the proposed draft of the right to information act (RTI), if it is allowed to be enacted, will only mean a sort of reappearance of the prevailing official secrecy act by reintroducing it with another name or guise when, ironically, the objective of the RTI ought to be repealing the secrecy act and substituting it with legislation that would lead to people truly obtaining rights to know about many things done by the government-- veiled from their eyes-- and not in the real public interest.
The media panel that gave its reactions on the draft ordinance, underlined how it fell far short of similar acts even in neighbouring India, Pakistan and Nepal. The RTIs in these countries expanded media's opportunities, rights and freedoms to investigate into almost anything and everything and let the people know of the findings. The draft RTI in Bangladesh, in its present form, seeks to preserve the status quo with only pretensions that it would make activities of government offices transparent.
Thus, nothing short of substantial rewriting or redrafting of this RTI will do, as has been emphasized by the journalists.
There is now universal recognition that human rights, including the vital right to information, are central to having responsible and responsive governance leading to good governance. The right to information is also considered to have an umbilical relationship to democracy. In a democracy, people must know everything that stands to affect them so that they can voice their opinion about them or even oppose them if these are found to be against their true interests. Thus, even our subcontinental neighbours --India, Pakistan and Nepal-- are noted for catching up with universal standards. They have RTIs when Bangladesh has been conspicuously lagging behind in this area.
However, all concerned in Bangladesh were inspired by the news that the incumbent interim government would introduce a right to information act. The primary initiatives to this end seemed satisfactory. The media members who would be understandably expected to be the main user of the act in prying out information in the interest of the people, they were requested to give their suggestions. This was done in earnest by the media. But now, the final draft of the RTI act is available and the very conspicuous feature of it is its near complete disregard of the suggestions made from the media.
A media panel gave their opinion on the proposed RTI ordinance on Sunday. Members of the panel found it so deficient that they unanimously shared the view that the draft, if approved in its present form, would be absolutely unacceptable to the media. The media members were not only voicing the reactions of their own community. Members of the civil society or all enlightened sections of the population in Bangladesh who are eager for positive developments to occur, are all likely to be one in voicing similar opinion. It was remarked in the media panel that " if passed as it is now, the law will be the worst in South Asia."
It appears that the media in its previous parleys with the government on the matter suggested exemption from application of the act as few subjects as possible to make the law a meaningful one. After all, media was not so unrealistic as to recommend absolutely unfettered access to information in all areas including the ones involving high priority areas of national security. The maintenance of some secrecy in these areas may be useful for the public good. But except a few areas, the recommendations were for withdrawing exemption from disclosure in all other areas in which there are justified public interests in doing the same. Only about nine areas were agreed on the two sides where exemption from disclosure would continue. But the draft RTI ordinance has extended this exemption list from nine to twenty areas. Thus, the proposed RTI, if enacted in its existing form, will only mean largely the preserving of the status quo of not divulging vital information to people in many areas. It would be a RTI act in name only with the reality being the continuation of the culture of secrecy and denial of information to people in much the same manner as so many areas would be exempt from disclosing information under it.
Many areas of governmental activities, NGOs and even political parties would get exemption from the mandatory requirement of disclosure of information on demand under the draft ordinance. Thus, its promulgation would only add to the tally of another rather fruitless law. Hardly the present stranglehold of the Official Secrecy Act which was introduced by the British colonials as an instrument of their oppression and which is in force today, will be removed.
As has been explained by a leading journalist of the country, the proposed draft of the right to information act (RTI), if it is allowed to be enacted, will only mean a sort of reappearance of the prevailing official secrecy act by reintroducing it with another name or guise when, ironically, the objective of the RTI ought to be repealing the secrecy act and substituting it with legislation that would lead to people truly obtaining rights to know about many things done by the government-- veiled from their eyes-- and not in the real public interest.
The media panel that gave its reactions on the draft ordinance, underlined how it fell far short of similar acts even in neighbouring India, Pakistan and Nepal. The RTIs in these countries expanded media's opportunities, rights and freedoms to investigate into almost anything and everything and let the people know of the findings. The draft RTI in Bangladesh, in its present form, seeks to preserve the status quo with only pretensions that it would make activities of government offices transparent.
Thus, nothing short of substantial rewriting or redrafting of this RTI will do, as has been emphasized by the journalists.