Topics: Access to Information

By Carrie McKee (Posted: September 14, 2012)

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday to strengthen the ties of the judiciary in information commissions across India. According to the ruling, commissions must now operate in the form of two member benches – with one member having a legal background – and the leadership of the Central Information Commission must be filled by a retired High Court Chief Justice or Supreme Court Justice. Positions were previously held by bureaucrats.

The Central Information Commission is currently staffed by eight members (out of eleven available posts), none of whom have legal experience. The ruling resulted from a Public Interest Litigation filed by Nawit Sharma, challenging the lack of judicial requirements for those operating in a quasi-judicial field.

The ruling is attached below.

By Carole Excell and Gilbert Sendugwa (Posted: August 23, 2012)

The Open Government Partnership (OGP) boasts some pretty lofty and much-needed goals. The global initiative aims to secure concrete commitments from governments to promote transparency, empower citizens, fight corruption, and harness new technologies to strengthen governance. It was officially launched September 20, 2011 by eight founding governments: Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, Norway, Philippines, South Africa, United Kingdom, and United States.

Now that the OGP is nearly one year old, it’s a good time to analyze how it’s faring—most notably in Africa, which has a long history of secrecy in government and lack of effective public participation.

The OGP in Africa

Since the OGP’s launch, 57 countries—mainly from Europe and the Americas—have joined the initiative. However, few countries in Africa actually meet eligibility requirements of the partnership, so expansion has been slow. OGP eligibility is based on governments’ demonstrated commitments to transparency in four key areas: timely publication of essential budget documents; adopting an access to information law guaranteeing the public’s right to government information; instituting rules requiring public disclosure of income and assets for elected and senior public officials; and openness to citizen participation in policy-making, including basic protections for civil liberties. Only six African countries currently meet the guidelines to join OGP: South Africa, Kenya, Tanzania, Liberia, Uganda, and Ghana.

Yet progress is being made towards open and transparent governance on the continent. With the exception of Uganda, all African countries currently eligible to join OGP have joined. Securing political commitment from these countries in OGP’s first year is remarkable.

South Africa, Tanzania, and most recently, Kenya, have already delivered their written transparency commitments, and Liberia and Ghana are set to provide draft action plans before the end of this year. The Ugandan government has yet to join the partnership, but a recent report from the Collaboration on International ICT Policy in East and Southern Africa provides a strong case for why the Ugandan Government should administer open government data programs, and the country’s civil society is actively urging its government to join OGP.

What Commitments Are Being Made?

A wide range of commitments came from South Africa, Kenya, and Tanzania. In fact, only a few similarities exist across the three countries’ written plans:

1. Budgets: Notably, all three governments included commitments on transparency and budgeting. South Africa plans to standardize a framework for civil society participation in government budgetary processes . Tanzania will produce an annual citizens’ budget document in an easy-to-understand format (both in Kiswahili and English). Kenya aims to involve the public in budgetary preparation using technology channels, including open government data platforms and by publishing budgetary data in machine readable format. This format ensures data is searchable and sortable, allowing citizens to better utilize it.

2. Access to Information Laws: Surprisingly, South Africa did not address improving implementation and enforcement of its Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA), and Kenya and Tanzania failed to address adoption and implementation of access to information laws. While the South African Government mentioned PAIA as an accomplishment, it did not commit to improve public institutions practice, public awareness of the law, or enforcement of appeals under the law, which are concerns civil society has raised for a number of years. In fact, the Government is currently seeking to finalize the Protection of State Information bill, or “the Secrecy Bill,” a move that’s considered extremely controversial internationally. Kenya’s action plan mentioned its commitment to passing a good Access to Information law, but failed to include any commitments on implementation. Tanzania’s action plan mentions an access to information law, but it only commits to “study global best practice of freedom of information laws in order to generate inputs for preparation of a potential freedom of information Bill,” a fairly weak commitment.

3. Public Participation: All submitted action plans call for improving citizens’ participation in governance. South Africa committed to develop a Citizen Participation guideline for Public Sector departments, as well as formalize partnerships with civil society organizations in nine provinces to ensure “service rights.” The country will also run a “Know Your Service Rights and Responsibilities” campaign. Tanzania agreed to improve its Citizens’ Website, aiming to achieve wider citizen participation in government by establishing an online platform for citizens to send comments by phone, email, and other means and receive feedback. Kenya committed to improve government service delivery by engaging the public in defining County and Constituency Electoral boundaries to bring government closer to citizens. Public participation will be made inclusive by using web, mobile, radio, TV, and public hearings.

4. Innovation: There were also some innovative commitments involving technology. In fact, all governments committed to develop portals or improve websites to engage citizenry. South Africa’s commitment to assess the feasibility of developing a publicly accessible environmental management information portal stands out as one of the most forward-thinking initiatives. The Tanzanian Government also committed to explore establishing “Nifanyeje?‟, a website where citizens can get practical information on how to receive Government services (like get a university scholarship, sign up for water or electricity services, or obtain a driver’s license). The Kenyan Government, which already has an open government data portal, committed to improve the platform and publish more data on health, education, water, and other essential services, as well as establish a public complaints portal.

What’s Next?

The fact that a few African nations have already joined the OGP is a solid step in the right direction. OGP has already proven itself to be an avenue for the delivery of new, exciting commitments on transparency and public participation in Africa.

However, there’s still a long road ahead. The fact that few African countries are currently eligible to join OGP is most concerning. Zambia, Rwanda, Morocco, and Tunisia have expressed an interest in joining, but more will need to be done to support these countries gaining eligibility.

In the meantime, making OGP a forum for innovation will require consistent public participation in creating commitments as well as in monitoring their implementation. This process will be bolstered by instituting an independent monitoring and review mechanism for OGP. The mechanism, which is currently being established, will independently assess whether governments are meeting their commitments.

Whether OGP will provide a long-term avenue for transparency and accountability in a comprehensive and holistic manner in African countries—and others, for that matter—is yet to be determined. But one thing is clear: After one year, OGP is off to a good start in Africa.

Note: This blog was originally posted on WRI Insights. It was co-written with Gilbert Sendugwa, Coordinator and Head of Secretariat for the Africa Freedom of Information Centre.

By Carrie McKee (Posted: August 7, 2012)

Well-known Ukrainian activist Volodymyr Honcharenko died on Friday, August 3rd from injuries sustained during a brutal attack two days prior. Honcharenko was en route to his dacha when he was blocked on the road by a group of men, pulled from his car, and viciously beaten. The attack came four days after a press conference in which Honcharenko made public information on 180 tons of toxic metal waste being held in the Kryvyi Rih district. Honcharenko called the waste a “chemical time bomb” and warned that the toxic material could end up in exported scrap metal.

Honcharenko was known for his work with the NGO For Citizens’ Rights to a Safe Environment and the newspaper ECO Safety, described by the Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group as the “sole reliable source of environmental information in Ukraine with data, references and evidence used not only by the media and individuals but by central and local authorities”. A member of the Academy of Engineering Sciences and the International Academy of Ecology, Human Safety and Nature, Honcharenko released diligent scientific reports with his colleagues. Honcharenko brought to light information on a number of issues, including the production and use of battery components, contamination of reservoirs and the quality of drinking water; the nuclear power industry, the ore enriching industry and radioactive contamination; the use of domestic and industrial waste, and others. He also advocated for access to accurate information, recently pointing out that the Ukrainian government hasn’t produced legally mandated reports on the state of the environment since 2005.

Honcharenko’s friends and colleagues are in “no doubt” that the attack was a result of his activism. They say he had previously received numerous threats, and was known for his pointed criticism of corporate negligence and government corruption.

In Honcharenko’s words: “The environment’s worst enemy is indifference and incompetence, and sometimes also criminal inaction from officials responsible for monitoring an environment safe for people’s life and health.”

Read more on Ukraine’s “chemical time bomb” here:http://www.khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1344173215

By Carrie McKee (Posted: July 16, 2012)

Q: What is Corporación Participa?

Participa is a Chilean NGO focused on democracy and human rights. It was founded 25 years ago as democracy was recovered in Chile. Participa works on issues around human rights, public participation, and access to information advocacy in Chile, and has been involved with The Access Initiative (TAI) since its inception.

Q: What is Participa’s involvement in initiating a regional convention on Principle 10?

During the TAI 2010 Global Gathering in Uganda, the network agreed to push for either a global convention or regional conventions for a legally binding framework on Principle 10, but we were flexible. Since then, we have found more political will for a regional convention as it can allow for more local specificities.

In preparation for Rio+20, Participa worked with government offices such as the Foreign Affairs Ministry and the Ministry of Environment to include Principle 10 in the government documents and national agenda. Participa was successful in forming a strategic partnership with the Chilean government, which increased pressure on other countries in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Before Rio+20, Peru, Costa Rica, Jamaica, and Chile were already committed to the regional convention and had agreed upon a draft declaration. Out of Rio, ten countries have signed on to the finalized LAC convention declaration- Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Jamaica, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Dominican Republic, and Uruguay.

Q: What are the next steps for this LAC convention?

In late November, a workshop will be hosted in Santiago with two representatives from each of the ten countries – one from the government and one from an NGO. This gathering will serve to acquaint key players with each other and the process in front of them. From January 26-27, 2013, Santiago will host the EU + CELAC Summit, during which there will be a panel to officially announce the LAC convention.

Q: What is the role of TAI partners in supporting the convention?

It is up to TAI partners to advocate for the convention in all LAC countries and to bring on governments and organizations that have not yet committed to the declaration. New partners in uncommitted countries must be identified and engaged with to ensure effective pressure across Latin America and the Caribbean. TAI partners must not only outreach but document the process, so it can be repeated in other regions around the world.

By Catherine Easton (Posted: July 11, 2012)

Open Data portals, as a means of providing citizens access to government data, are becoming increasingly popular platforms being adopted by governments internationally. On June 19, 2012, the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the Access Initiative (TAI) hosted the “Choosing our Future: Open and Participatory Sustainable Development Governance” event in Rio de Janeiro, alongside the Rio+20 negotiations. At this event, WRI organized a workshop on “Access to Information and Open Government Data in Africa,” in association with the Institute of Law and Environmental Governance (Kenya), Greenwatch (Uganda), Centre for Democratic Development (Ghana), and Open Democracy Advice Centre (South Africa). The workshop was held to understand the context in Africa for the development of open government data portals.

The workshop provided an opportunity for WRI to share preliminary findings highlighting the importance of proactively released government data, from its Access to Information in Africa project, with partners. This project, funded by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC – Canada), aims to better understand transparency models and environmental accountability in Africa, and to inform policymakers and citizen groups engaged in building the infrastructure for greater transparency.

As a part of this project, WRI has developed preliminary templates that list proposed types of data and information that governments should proactively disclose without a formal request, for each natural resource considered in the project (oil, mining, forests, environment, land and water). Through the discussion, a number of improvements to the draft templates were identified. Moreover, the general importance of proactive disclosure of information by governments was continuously stressed. Establishing minimum standards for proactive release of information would alleviate problems associated with 1) procedures for requesting information in developing countries that are often difficult for citizens to navigate, and 2) the lack of resources and capacity for governments to reactively respond to individual information requests.

Along with several other key messages from the workshop, the importance of government collaboration in sharing the means and infrastructure for data collection and dissemination is crucial. Some countries are far more advanced than others. Only ten African countries have passed Access to information acts, but only two, Morocco and Kenya, have implemented open government data portals. While launching a portal is a big step in the right direction, after one year, Kenya’s portal is still not well populated. The sharing of best practices, legal approaches, open source software, applications and development of model standards could alleviate the burden on each government to re-invent the wheel.

For a detailed list of all the key messages from the workshop, as well as summaries of the presentations, please see the full report from the workshop, attached.

By Carrie McKee (Posted: July 10, 2012)

Ramesh Agrawal, partner of The Access Initiative (TAI) and RTI activist with the NGO Jan Chetna Manch, is in stable condition after being shot on the morning of Saturday, July 7th in his district of Raigarh. The long-time environmental advocate came to prominence due to his altercations with Jindal Steel and Power, Ltd (JSPL) and members of Jan Chetna Manch have accused JSPL of ordering the attack. Following the incident, Agrawal was rushed to the district government hospital where doctors removed two bullets from his thigh. No arrests have been made.

Raghubir Pradhan, a fellow activist and acquaintance of Mr. Agrawal, described the attack to The Hindu: “Rameshji was in his internet cafe when two men came into the shop on the excuse of some computer-related work. They told him to stop opposing Jindal and put a gun to his chest. There was a scuffle and Mr. Agrawal was shot through the thigh.”

JSPL strongly denies the allegations, telling The Hindu: “This is a very unfortunate incident. We strongly condemn this act of violence. We deny the allegations and have nothing to do with this incident.”

The steel and energy powerhouse, chaired by Member of Parliament Naveen Jindal, has found its attempts to bypass environmental regulations in the state of Chhattisgarh obstructed by the work of Agrawal and his fellow activists. In 2010, JSPL began construction on a 2,400 MW-power plant without receiving proper clearance from the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), a violation pointed out to the MoEF in a letter written by Agrawal. The ministry subsequently withdrew their approval of the project. Though terms of reference were eventually restored by the MoEF, Agrawal’s advocacy caused a major setback for the company.

The shooting is the most recent in a series of abuses brought against Mr. Agrawal by JSPL and the local police. On May 28th, 2011, Agrawal was arrested at the behest of the Jindal business group on charges of defamation, insult, and making false statements after speaking out against proposed industrial expansion at a public hearing. During the period of his arrest Agrawal’s human and civil rights were repeatedly violated, as he was chained and handcuffed to his bed and given delayed and insufficient medical attention. Agrawal was held for over two months by local authorities, gaining wide attention and garnering the support of Amnesty International.

Saturday’s shooting has made Mr. Agrawal one of three RTI activists attacked in India in the last two weeks. Akhil Gogoi in Assam and Bharat Jhunjhunwala in Uttarakhand have both been victims of violence as they fight hydroelectric projects in their respective states.