The Sunday Times: Sri Lanka: Sunday,
July 24, 2016.
It is some
irony that information on the status of the Right to the Access of Information
(RTI) Bill that was passed unanimously by Parliament a fortnight ago is itself
so hard to access. What has now transpired (having to ferret out the
information the old fashioned way) is that after the passage of the Bill and
the Speaker ready with his pen to give his assent to make the Bill into law,
some niggle on the wording cropped up and his hand was stayed.
The Bill with
the amendments moved on the floor of the House at voting time had to go back to
the Legal Draftsman for ‘cleaning up’ and no one is now sure what the end
product will look like. The Speaker meanwhile had to be rushed to Singapore for
medical attention which was a drama of its own with him being involuntarily
offloaded by an airline. So as of today, the RTI is still not law.
For 12 long
years since 2004 when a then Freedom of Information Bill was presented to
Parliament, successive Governments under two Presidents kept this law, which
gives every citizen of Sri Lanka the right to access certain official
information hitherto kept away from their eyes, in cold storage. If that effort
had been successful back in 2004, Sri Lanka would not only have ranked as the
first in South Asia to have such a then modern law, but half the corruption
that is being highlighted now in the media and in court may, arguably have come
to light long before, or in fact, been prevented.
The National
Unity Government must be commended even belatedly, and despite some feet-dragging
post January 2015 when it promised this law in 100 days, for pushing the Bill
through Parliament. In particular, the Prime Minister’s personal interest in
ensuring the enactment from the time that he headed the drafting committee
himself in 2004 is noteworthy, even if his interest waned in recent years. The
fact that the Bill was passed unanimously by a generally quarrelsome House is a
rare feat. More so, as its positive features, such as the right of the public
to demand the disclosure of information from state agencies “in the public
interest” even in regard to all the otherwise exempted information (common to
such laws across the democratic world) were left untouched in the passing.
It is
unfortunate, however, that, despite the best efforts of the drafting committee
finalising the Bill, the RTI Commission established under the law was not
vested with more efficacious power in regard to directly ensuring the
implementation of its orders and to ensure the release of public documents in
the public interest. Across the Palk Strait, the Indian RTI Commission is in a
better position. Indeed, the RTI experience in India has transformed the
functioning of the government largely due to the courage of RTI advocates, some
of whom have even died in the process at the hands of those who want to conceal
information for their own personal gains at the expense of the nation.
It is also
necessary that the RTI provision in the 19th Amendment that was rushed through
Parliament last year in a crazed frenzy unprecedented in the passing of laws in
this country, be reviewed at the earliest opportunity. Its generalised and
vague restrictions must be tightened. Otherwise, there exists the possibility
for the constitutional restrictions to prevail overriding the RTI law,
confusing its interpretation and undermining its thrust.
That said,
the worth of a law, lies not in the letter but in the spirit of its
implementation. We have a sad tradition of good laws lying unused in our
statute books. The RTI law must not be allowed to fall into that uninspiring
lot. Further, laws contemplated to be passed in the future by Parliament must
not be put out of reach of the RTI. This will violate the citizen’s trust and
the public interest. We may hasten to add moreover that this law is not for the
sole benefit of the Media as is sometimes wrongfully perceived.
This basic
misapprehension on the part of some must be erased from the public psyche.
In this
region, and elsewhere, RTI has been most frequently used by ordinary villagers
in demanding accountability regarding the expenditure of public funds as well
as by public spirited citizens in exposing corruption scandals, especially in
countries where there is a culture of secrecy rather than transparency. As Sri
Lanka enters the information age, even as a late entrant due to the follies of
its politicians, this fact may be kept in mind.
Once the
Speaker returns, we hope he will make haste to sign this Bill into Law, for he
was one who took a personal interest in promoting this very Bill that was
presented to Parliament in 2004 and on a later date as a Private Member’s Bill
when the then Government made it clear it had no interest in its passage for
reasons that are obvious given the corruption scandals during its tenure that
are getting highlighted on a weekly basis now.
What will
follow is a gigantic task for the Media Ministry tasked with its implementation
and the Government in appointing the right people, not its stooges, to the
all-important RTI Commission so that this law will be spiritedly employed for
the benefit of all Sri Lankan citizens.