Unlocking information through RTI

by Rushana Rizwie and Dhaneshi Yatawara

The proposed Sri Lankan Right to Information Bill (RTI) - by now approved by the Cabinet and tipped to be presented to the Parliament in January - is drawing mixed reactions from RTI activists and campaigners.

Despite the good intentions behind the bill, there is an ongoing debate about ending up with a law that does not necessarily empower the citizenry as the RTI laws elsewhere have been able to achieve. This provided the basis for a discussion among South Asian RTI experts and practitioners who recently gathered in Colombo to define ways to improve the current draft.

Local consultation

A consultation meeting, held recently which brought South Asian and Australian experts in Right to Information (RTI) to Colombo, were of the view that there should be more powers vested with the Information Commission to ensure effective implementation of the new law.

Organized by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) in alliance with the International Centre for Ethnic Studies, the consultation brought together representatives from civil society, RTI movements and functionaries of various statutory authorities, said a spokesperson for the International Centre for Ethnic Studies.

RTI experience

Speaking to the media, Venkatesh Nayak, Indian RTI expert in the Access to Information Program of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), said that within the last decade, the Right to Information has gathered a wealth of experience, which needs to be used more in formulating the Sri Lankan law for right to information.

Commenting about the Sri Lanka's initial effort to bringing in RTI nearly a decade ago, Nayak said that Pakistan initiative was the only experience the region had. "But now there is so much experience from jurisdictions of the region and that is what Sri Lanka should be capitalizing on," he explained. "The earlier drafted bill is not incorrect but there had been so much of development in the region with regard to RTI and that need to be considered and if necessary added to the new draft," he added.

Elaborating on the Indian experience, Nayak said that the civil societies and experts of the field have figured out that the Central Information Commission must have full powers to act. It should be able to take its own action rather going through the regular legal system. It should be in a position to guide the government on transparency and other crucial issues.

There should be enough powers with the public authorities to listen to the public and take appropriate action," he added.

The crucial factor is deciding on the composition of the commission - where as the current focus is only on relevant authorities, media and several civil organisations and why not other segments of the society. Experts representing a vast array of fields is ideal," he pointed out.

Continuing, Nayak said that transparency is not an easy transition to make in a political culture that was used to a lot of secrecy, where the default option has always been on secrecy or privacy. "The commission needs to be there full time for the people to take necessary action," he added. "The commission should be able to take decisions independently to protect the rights of the people," he added.

On a plus point, he added that the addition of civil society groups in addition to citizens included in the drafted bill is an advance decision in establishing rights of the people.

Continuing the process will be challenging too, said Professor Kalim Ullah, Information Commissioner of the Right to Information Commission of Pakistan. Commenting on his experience, he said that the concern is whether the officials or authorities, who are also people of the country, are ready to share the information. "Information is always barred and Right to Information is the weapon to fight," he said.

He pointed out that the law enforcing right to information will be effective only if the authorities understand that these information belong to the people and the Government is only a custodian.

Ownership

On the other hand people should understand that this is their right and they also should be ready to take the ownership of this law, he highlighted.

If the citizen starts to recognize this as a mechanism to monitor the Government they elected then the process will work," he added.

A long standing activist for right to information in Nepal, Tanka Aryal, the Executive Director of Nepal's Citizens' Campaign for the Right to Information, said it should be clearly stated that how the civil society groups are legally entitled to in the process.

"It needs to be clearly drafted where the civil societies stand in the process. Otherwise in the long run it will create chaos," said Aryal, based on his experience in campaigning for the right to information.

He also added that there should be space for other professional organizations in the process without limiting it only to professionals of the legal field. "The privilege should be given to all sectors of the society and all professional fields," he stressed.

Article 19, an American Human Rights Organization has called on the Sri Lankan Government to enact the finalized draft of the Right to Information Bill which was approved by Cabinet recently would be "one of the best in the world."

"The draft Right to Information Bill put forward by Cabinet would firmly protect the right in law and therefore we urge parliament to adopt the Act without changes, so that the people of Sri Lanka can being to use it," Thomas Hughes, ARTICLE 19's Executive Director said in a statement.

"Once adopted, the next few years will be a crucial test: having a good Act does not necessarily result in a transparent and accountable government. Experiences from neighbouring countries show that the hard work is about to begin: to ensure that information officers are quickly appointed and trained, and civil society needs to begin requesting as soon as possible," said he.

Commenting on points to improve, he added that since the bill limits the right to Sri Lankan citizens only. However, information, like other human rights, should be available to everyone. Many marginalized people or those displaced by conflict may not have citizenship or evidence of citizenship and would therefore be denied their right, it pointed out. Hughes also pointed out that the long time limits to release information could be reduced.

Speaking on the exemptions on information relating to defense, national security and trade negotiations, he suggested that it could be further limited with a requirement that the exemption only applies to the release of such information that is likely to cause serious harm.