A recent survey, on rating the Right to Information laws around the world, conducted by Center for Law and Democracy and Access Info Europe, reveals an interesting trend in the 'strength' of the laws. The survey, which covers 61 indicators and totals to a maximum of 150 points, reveals that the early adopters of the RTI laws, were relatively weak in comparison to those which adopted in the last 10-15 years. The survey shows that the top 20 countries with scores over 100 tend to be younger laws, while Europe overall accounts for 15 of the bottom 20 countries, which score around 60. This is not surprising as the older laws are more limited in scope and have weaker appeals mechanisms, while the latter ones benefited from the knowledge and expertise generated in the last 10-15 years.
But one thing, that is coming to the fore in those countries which have adopted the laws in recent times, and therefore scored higher, is the resistance being put up by the public officials in the implementation of the law. Among these countries, India (which has the second highest score of 130) and South Africa (which has a score of 112), stand out with their efforts at excluding agencies (as in the case of India) and adoption of a 'secrecy law' (in the case of South Africa), whose primary aim is to push back the gains made by the people and civil society in promoting greater transparency in the public sector.
These developments do not bode well for the efforts at promoting transparency and accountability, but do fit in within the overall framework of the state of political development in these countries. It is no surprise then that those countries which adopted RTI laws early, have other advantages, like better rule of law, greater integration of technology in providing public services, well informed public and better overall infrastructure to provide public services.
This means that it is necessary that laws and policies that are aimed at promoting transparency and accountability should go hand in hand with other measures like adopting and implementing the necessary infrastructure, educating the public about their right to know and even improving the rule of law, as evidenced by the recent murders' of RTI activists in India. A promising development in India, is the proposed draft Electronic Services Delivery Bill, whose intent is to "fix the timelines for mandatory electronic service delivery" which can enable an "efficient, transparent and reliable delivery of web enabled public services in a definite and time bound manner to citizens, thereby transforming Governance".
The resistance to the Secrecy Bill in South Africa and the planned move to take the issue to the Constitutional Court, which will be asked to declare it unconstitutional, as the secrecy bill goes against the constitutional provision on access to information, is heartening to note.
It is imperative that we need to resist the opposition of the public officials, while also demanding for other measures to promote transparency and accountability, especially in creating the necessary frameworks of law and policies.
But one thing, that is coming to the fore in those countries which have adopted the laws in recent times, and therefore scored higher, is the resistance being put up by the public officials in the implementation of the law. Among these countries, India (which has the second highest score of 130) and South Africa (which has a score of 112), stand out with their efforts at excluding agencies (as in the case of India) and adoption of a 'secrecy law' (in the case of South Africa), whose primary aim is to push back the gains made by the people and civil society in promoting greater transparency in the public sector.
These developments do not bode well for the efforts at promoting transparency and accountability, but do fit in within the overall framework of the state of political development in these countries. It is no surprise then that those countries which adopted RTI laws early, have other advantages, like better rule of law, greater integration of technology in providing public services, well informed public and better overall infrastructure to provide public services.
This means that it is necessary that laws and policies that are aimed at promoting transparency and accountability should go hand in hand with other measures like adopting and implementing the necessary infrastructure, educating the public about their right to know and even improving the rule of law, as evidenced by the recent murders' of RTI activists in India. A promising development in India, is the proposed draft Electronic Services Delivery Bill, whose intent is to "fix the timelines for mandatory electronic service delivery" which can enable an "efficient, transparent and reliable delivery of web enabled public services in a definite and time bound manner to citizens, thereby transforming Governance".
The resistance to the Secrecy Bill in South Africa and the planned move to take the issue to the Constitutional Court, which will be asked to declare it unconstitutional, as the secrecy bill goes against the constitutional provision on access to information, is heartening to note.
It is imperative that we need to resist the opposition of the public officials, while also demanding for other measures to promote transparency and accountability, especially in creating the necessary frameworks of law and policies.
