The Daily Star: Bangladesh: Monday,
October 17, 2016.
How often do
we make use of our networks to get the information we need? Whether the
transformer in the neighbourhood is out of order or a relative needs a new
passport, we instinctively reach for our networks: old school friends,
colleagues, extended family and contacts. Networks are as old as humanity. But
what about when we want to hold our government accountable, when it is not just
about my need for information but my right? That is when we reach for the law.
The
overwhelming majority of Right to Information (RTI) laws around the world were
enacted in the last quarter of a century, following the end of the Cold War.
They became one of the fastest growing legislations in the contemporary world.
States are ranked today on the strength of their RTI/Freedom of Information
laws to ensure the transparency and accountability of their governments to
citizens. In South Asia, the Indian RTI Act is ranked 4th in the world, Sri
Lanka 9th, Maldives 12th, Bangladesh 23rd and Pakistan 89th. With a clear
global trend towards recognition of this important right, its inclusion as
target 16.10 in the recently adopted Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) was
logical.
Good
legislation alone, however, cannot be the sole measure of efficacy of the law.
That depends largely on how it is implemented. The global debate on RTI/FOI
laws is, therefore, increasingly focused on assessing whether it is
contributing to unveiling the traditional culture of official secrecy and
making governance more open to people.
The key
questions raised include: are public officials becoming more respectful of the
law and responding positively to people's demand for government-held
information? Are the provisions of the law being interpreted correctly? Is the
law helping to change the age-old bureaucratic mindset of public officials and
contributing to systemic change in governance?
Very little,
if any, substantive discussion on the above questions is taking place in
Bangladesh. Such discussion would include the use of RTI by citizens to
contribute, individually and collectively, to making the government more
transparent and accountable; to fight corruption in public offices; to assess
if systemic changes are taking place; to devise strategies for effective
collaboration between citizen-groups and public authorities for progressive
improvement in the implementation of the law; and more.
When the
journey began seven years ago, our focus as a nation was understandably on
proper dissemination of the law and establishing the required mechanism for its
implementation, including creating demand and generating applications for
information.
The law was
premised on a very new concept, which challenged our historical experience in
citizen-state relationship - acquired since colonial times - and which opened
up revolutionary possibilities for a fundamental change in that relationship.
Instinctively, we chose the easiest path, which was to use the law primarily to
redress personal grievances. In this way, marginalised communities and poverty
groups in the country were able to use the law to obtain their due benefits
from the government's safety-net programmes.
However,
since we have now gained some experience and have been enriched by knowledge
gathered through growing interaction with RTI/Freedom of Information networks
throughout the world, the time has come for us to recognise that there is more
to the law than simply using it for benefits to individuals or small groups.
The RTI Act
evolved globally as an instrument to empower citizens to oversee the work of
the government, to monitor its activities, to help fight corruption and make
public officials more citizen-friendly and law-abiding. This explains why the
progress of RTI has been made a target in the SDG. RTI captures the essence of
democracy in which power belongs to the people, who rule through their
representatives, who serve the people on basis of the laws of the land and
where citizens collaborate with the government to strengthen good governance.
Citizens can
ask for any information, except for those specifically exempted under the law,
from the concerned public authority. The latter is not entitled to ask why the
information is “needed”. The basic assumption is that citizens seek information
under the Act to exercise their right and to fulfill their role in
strengthening transparency and accountability in the work of public
authorities. The “need” for information does not figure in the law.
Focusing on
the “rights” aspect will encourage the middle and educated classes to use the
law, which has not been the case so far. Most members of the middle class
currently claim that they avoid asking for information from public authorities
for fear of possible reprisals; and in any case, they can obtain any
information they may “need” through their networks.
However, the
“need to know” may vary from person to person; the “right to know” belongs to
all citizens. If the focus is firmly placed on “rights” – and the power of the
law to compel public officials to respect that right is properly propagated –
it is likely that citizens of the country who are well-known for their
social/political activism and always maintain a critical watch on the government
would be more likely to make use of the law. If influential social and
political activists use the law, they set a trend for its broader fulfillment.
Irrespective of what an activist's agenda may be, as observers and advocates
for RTI, our role is not to judge but to encourage the use of the law.
In this
context, we can ask if those agitating against the Rampal coal-based power
project near the Sundarbans are fully aware of the RTI Act and its potential to
advance their cause. RTI is effectively used by environmentalists in many
countries.
Upholding the
“rights” aspect of RTI and firmly rejecting the often wrongly-imposed “need to
know” requirement in its application can be a useful strategy to advance the
use of RTI by all sections of the society, particularly the
socially/politically aware population. A “right” requires a commitment from an
authority to respect. RTI imposes that commitment on the government. Our
government has assumed that commitment by adopting the RTI Act. It is for
citizens to effectively utilise that right.
The writer is
the Chairman of Research Initiatives, Bangladesh (RIB). Email:
rib@citech-bd.com.
.JPG)
.JPG)
