Right to information is a fundamental human right
Thursday, 4 October 2007
Abdus Salam
PEOPLE'S right to information has been widely accepted as a prerequisite for the effective functioning of a democracy. Over 40 countries across the world have comprehensive laws to facilitate access to state records and more than 30 are in the process of enacting such legislation. Although freedom of information laws have existed since 1776, when Sweden passed its Freedom of the Press Act, the last decade has seen an unprecedented number of countries adopting access to information legislation.
There are several reasons for this trend:
1. Since the 1980s, the emergence of new democracies has given rise to new constitutions that include specific guarantees of the right to information.
2. There has been agitation from media and civil society groups, for greater access to information held by the government and for more participation in governance.
3. Finally, several international bodies have been promoting freedom of information, and donor organisations have been encouraging countries to adopt access to information laws, as part of an effort to increase Government transparency and reduce corruption.
In Bangladesh, The Official Secrets Act of 1923 is an obstruction to the right to information of the people. 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.
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". 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" . 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 relies 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. 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. 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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 programmes 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." 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.
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.
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 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. 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. 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.'
In 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.
The people of Bangladesh now feel the need for a law to ensure their right to information. Access to information legislation must :
* Begin with a clear statement that establishes the rule of maximum disclosure and a strong presumption in favour of access;
* Contain definitions of information and bodies covered that are wide and inclusive, and include private corporations and non-government organisations where their activities affect people's rights;
* Strictly limit and narrowly define any restrictions on access to information. Any body denying access must provide reasons and prove that disclosure would cause serious harm and that denial is in the overall public interest;
* Override inconsistent and restrictive provisions in existing laws;
* Require governments to create and maintain records management systems that meet public needs;
* Include clear and uncomplicated procedures that ensure quick responses at affordable fees;
* Create powerful independent bodies that are mandated to review any refusal to disclose information, compel release, and monitor and promote implementation;
* Impose penalties and sanctions on those who wilfully obstruct access to information;
* Provide protection for individuals who, in good faith, provide information that reveals wrongdoing or mismanagement;
* Contain an obligation to routinely and proactively disseminate updates about structure, norms and functioning of public bodies including the documents they hold, their finances, activities and any opportunities for consultation;
* Contain provisions obligating the government to actively undertake training for government officials and public education about the right to access information.
(The writer can be reached at e-mail: karnafuli@myway.com)
PEOPLE'S right to information has been widely accepted as a prerequisite for the effective functioning of a democracy. Over 40 countries across the world have comprehensive laws to facilitate access to state records and more than 30 are in the process of enacting such legislation. Although freedom of information laws have existed since 1776, when Sweden passed its Freedom of the Press Act, the last decade has seen an unprecedented number of countries adopting access to information legislation.
There are several reasons for this trend:
1. Since the 1980s, the emergence of new democracies has given rise to new constitutions that include specific guarantees of the right to information.
2. There has been agitation from media and civil society groups, for greater access to information held by the government and for more participation in governance.
3. Finally, several international bodies have been promoting freedom of information, and donor organisations have been encouraging countries to adopt access to information laws, as part of an effort to increase Government transparency and reduce corruption.
In Bangladesh, The Official Secrets Act of 1923 is an obstruction to the right to information of the people. 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.
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". 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" . 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 relies 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. 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. 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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 programmes 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." 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.
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.
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 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. 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. 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.'
In 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.
The people of Bangladesh now feel the need for a law to ensure their right to information. Access to information legislation must :
* Begin with a clear statement that establishes the rule of maximum disclosure and a strong presumption in favour of access;
* Contain definitions of information and bodies covered that are wide and inclusive, and include private corporations and non-government organisations where their activities affect people's rights;
* Strictly limit and narrowly define any restrictions on access to information. Any body denying access must provide reasons and prove that disclosure would cause serious harm and that denial is in the overall public interest;
* Override inconsistent and restrictive provisions in existing laws;
* Require governments to create and maintain records management systems that meet public needs;
* Include clear and uncomplicated procedures that ensure quick responses at affordable fees;
* Create powerful independent bodies that are mandated to review any refusal to disclose information, compel release, and monitor and promote implementation;
* Impose penalties and sanctions on those who wilfully obstruct access to information;
* Provide protection for individuals who, in good faith, provide information that reveals wrongdoing or mismanagement;
* Contain an obligation to routinely and proactively disseminate updates about structure, norms and functioning of public bodies including the documents they hold, their finances, activities and any opportunities for consultation;
* Contain provisions obligating the government to actively undertake training for government officials and public education about the right to access information.
(The writer can be reached at e-mail: karnafuli@myway.com)