|
The Imperatives of Freedom of Information
*By
Yushau Shuaib,
ThisDay,
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
While
the Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill is lying fallow
somehow, the nation wakes to note free and unsolicited full
disclosures on political and financial state of affairs from
the powerful public offices in Nigeria through the media.
The legitimacy or otherwise of the exposure of hidden deals
and confidential documents would not have generated
controversy if the FOI bill has been passed.
At the
time the imbroglio was raging on those disclosures, a
workshop was going on in Abuja on the Freedom of Information
which was organized by Media Rights Agenda (MRA) with the
support of UK Government’s Global Opportunities Fund:
Present at the programme were representatives of EFCC, ICPC,
Nigerian Police, the military, Code of Conducts Bureau,
Human Right Commission, National Press Centre, INEC,
Security Printing Coy, Judiciary and a host of other
sensitive stakeholders. I was in attendance to realize what
Nigeria misses for not passing the FOI Bill.
The
participants at the workshop might not require much case
studies going by the development in the polity. As a section
to the conflict doles out a litany of indictments, the other
party rains down torrents of allegations and accusations to
the curious populace. The reality is that the public is
overwhelmed by the magnitude of hard facts and officials
documents that have wrapped up the media; instead of being
amused they are bemused and in suspense of what may happen
next.
Though
there is a provision in the 1999 Constitution on the
principles of freedom of expression, it requires enabling
legislations for freedom (free-exchange) of information for
citizens to exercise these rights. The Freedom of
Information (FOI) Bill is a necessary instrument required to
get pure and substantiated political and financial
disclosures on decisions of public institutions for the
benefit of the public. The Bill which has been in the
National Assembly for some years seeks to provide a right to
public information or records kept by government, public
institutions and/or private bodies carrying out public
functions for citizens and non-citizens. This will promote
transparency and accountability in all the sectors. The
legislation is not a strange phenomenon as other countries
have operated it through decades like Sweden since 1766, USA
1966, and France 1978 amongst other advanced countries. In
Africa we have countries like South Africa in 2000 as an
example amongst others.
The
delay in the legislation in most African countries was as a
result of the culture of secrecy that prevails across the
public service as a reflection of the legacy of the Official
Secret Act of colonial masters, which regulates and
regiments the civil service in such a way that openness is
usually sanctioned. Also, as could be observed, one-party
states behave secretively to protect political leaders
against stiff opposition and rebellion from their
citizenries. As vital as access to information is, a culture
of secrecy in a democratic government, negates the spirit of
openness, accountability and transparency.
The
archaic Law and Secrecy which is deployed to reprimand and
sanction lesser mortals (Civil servants/workers) may need to
be revised to reflect the digital age and democratic norms.
In fact such secrecy laws call for amendments as documents
that had been classified as Top Secret have ended up in Mai
suya joint and Akara seller to wrap customers’ meals, as
well as the antics of officers who are in the habit of using
strangers to type and photocopy confidential materials at
business centers across-the-road.
As
advantageous as Freedom of Information is in other countries
there are legitimate exemptions to avoid interference with
judicial process, its abuses for criminality and subversion
of nation’s security. Some notable exemptions include those
bordering on defence, international affairs, law
enforcement, commercially sensitive information. The
commercially sensitive information does not exempt financial
institutions from public enquiry and scrutiny. In fact with
the success of the consolidation in the banking sector in
Nigeria, the citizen may have the right to know the
operations and dealings of banks in that exercise. Clear
pictures of privatization processes and the identity of
major players may satisfy the curiosity of the citizenry.
From the political angle too, the citizen may be delighted
to know the sources of funding of political parties,
campaign rallies and their statements of account since they
all serve the public interest. Even states may be compelled
to give detailed account of their expenditures on public and
private causes and on such flimsies as congratulatory
messages, chieftaincy titles and flamboyant honorary awards
to enable the citizen measure their relevance to their
welfare.
Since
the Federal Government has been proactive in publishing
monthly disbursements from the Federation Account, it is
desirable that the tiers also give details of their
expenditures to avoid suspicions, campaigns of calumny and
denials from likely opponents. Without even prompting, the
citizens require full information on how they are
represented and governed.
The very
nature of democratic government implies accountability and
transparency, a free press and other democratic checks.
Interestingly, Nigeria as a developing nation has free and
independent press. Its media have successfully exposed
corruption in higher places and remained undaunted in the
face of victimization, politicization and sentiment
expressed in some quarters against their professional
stubbornness. Nigerians are now more comfortable and
believe in the information from the impartial press than
from opposition politicians who are usually one-sided in
their attempt to nail those in the authority. Therefore the
media may be given unfettered access to information for the
benefit of the citizenry. With the strong investigative
journalism in Nigeria and the likelihood that the media may
further be strengthened by passage of the bill to expose
corrupt practices, the fear and risk of discovery will
ultimately reduce inordinate tendencies of institutions and
officers to vices.
Though
one of the sanctions in the bill is jail term for
destruction and falsification of documents in an attempt to
protect vested interest or commit fraud, the FOI Bill in the
National Assembly has no provision for an agency to monitor
its implementation. In other nations they assign statutory
roles for ombudsmen to investigations. Ombudsman is
independent in monitoring the application of FOI for the
promotion of access to information by investigating
complaints, mediating between the seeker of information and
the institution concerned and also has power to enforce
rulings. It would be desirable for our legislators to insert
this provision for instituting the regulator.
We are
indeed in a very interesting period which calls for the
support of FOI bill which recognizes the citizen’s right to
know, promote war against corruption and sustained economic
development. If activities of public institutions are
subjected to scrutiny, it will be easier to measure their
efforts against their goals and our expectations. Just as
the media provides cover for whistleblowers as reliable
sources, FOI would guarantee their maximum protection to
further promote openness and transparency in service
delivery. It is when the public is adequately informed,
truthfully and honestly on services that they would feel the
impact and be proud to identify with the institutions.
*
Shuaib wrote from Abuja.
|