Shwarji Goshit & Joy Kaura
dreamt of in the past. One of such blessings is the freedom to access
information. However, the reason for acquiring such knowledge/ information
is highly questionable and has become a subject of debate. The most
unfortunate group of people hit by the necessity to access information is
the government and all its parastatals and agencies. The question of doing
things under the guise of "National Interest" and keeping it out of the
prying eyes of hovering journalist ready to pounce on any piece of
information vital or not may soon become history if the Freedom of
Information (FOI) Act is properly implemented.
With the advent of the internet, it has become possible for information to
travel much faster and easier. The increase in the number of media houses in
the past decade has made it very easy for information to be disseminated.
For instance with a click of the mouse, information can be sent to people
anywhere in the world. More so, the presence of handy mobile phones has made
it possible to reach a wider degree of audience within a short period of
time. Interestingly in the past few years, blogging has become increasingly
popular and many internet users depend on it for information (although
information on these blog sites are usually not vetted and may be false).
Most newspaper houses also have online versions of their news to reach a
wider degree of users. The constant use of social media platforms such as
Facebook, Twitter, etc has made this spread possible within seconds.
The question however that still lingers is whether the information being
sent is authentic and if the source is original and can be vetted? Does
every act or omission by individuals or public officers become a headline?
Does every activity of government and its officials or agencies translate
into a headline? For instance, the military might argue that if every piece
of information at their disposal is made public, then most of their
operations will be jeopardized as the success of their operations depends
largely on the secrecy of their operations. Information that was never in
the public eye in the past few years, have of recent found its way to the
public domain. There has been an increasing need for information from the
general public and a constant press for knowledge on activities of
government officials and people in public office. For instance, the quest
for people to know the killers of Dele Giwa has generated a lot of
controversy. On the negative, one will want to ask if the leak of
"classified" documents by Wikileaks is important, necessary or even legal.
Also, many cases which are subject of Police investigations or are sub
judice, have been reported with some degree of accuracy.
The press often called the "fourth realm of the estate" has the duty to
report activities of all the other arms of government to ensure transparency
and accountability in the activities of civil servants and public office
holders. One of the attributes of a good democracy is the level of
information that can be accessed by members of the general public. In
Nigeria's growing democracy, the access to information is necessary. Public
officers and civil servants have to be held accountable for their actions.
Take for instance; information has emerged as to the misappropriation of
public funds by public officers. The passage of the Freedom of Information
Act, in 2011 is a great achievement to the proponents of freedom of
information.
The foundation of the Act is the belief that the government is accountable
for its actions and that the public possesses a right to obtain information
about those actions. This can be gleaned from the preamble to the Act which
states thus:
"An act to make public record and information freely available, provide for
public access to public records and information, protect public records and
information to the extent consistent with the public interest and the
protection of personal privacy, protect serving public officers from adverse
consequences for disclosing certain official information and establish
procedures for the achievement of those purposes and related purposes
thereof".
The Act provides inter alia for the right of information, those who should
have a right or standing to request information under a freedom of
information regime and under what circumstances information may be denied
those seeking them; what departments or organs of government would be
responsible for about their activities and operations. A public institution
shall ensure the proper organization and maintenance of all information in
its releasing information and documents to those seeking them; and
determining the agencies and arms of government to which the legislation
would extend. And the circumstances under which the right to know will be
denied. The Act endows citizens with the "right to access or request
information whether or not contained in any written form, which is in the
custody or possession of any public official agency or institution howsoever
described'.
Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act, 2011, states as follows:
(1)Notwithstanding anything contained in any other Act, law or regulation,
the right of any person to access or request information, whether or not
contained in any written form, which is in the custody or possession of any
public official, agency or institution howsoever described, is established.
(2)An applicant under this Act needs not demonstrate any specific interest
in the information being applied for.
(3)Any person entitled to the right to information under this Act, shall
have the right to institute proceedings in the Court to compel any public
institution to comply with the provisions of this Act.
The provisions of the Act are explicit enough and go a long way in ensuring
that government organizations provide such information as needed. It is
believed that with the passage of the Act, those conducting Government
business will be a lot more careful, and the Act will help to check
corruption and other forms of unfair dealings.
Section 3 of the Act mandates public institutions to ensure that they keep
record and information in a manner that facilitates public access to such
information. The list of information required to be published or kept in the
custody of a public institution is contained in Section 3 (3) and ranges
from a description of the organization and responsibilities to the functions
of each division, a list of all classes of records under the control to
facilitate the exercise of the right to information under the Act, documents
containing factual reports, inspection reports whether prepared by or for
the Institution, documents containing information in relation to the receipt
or expenditure of public or other funds of the institution among a host of
many others."
A public institution has the duty to ensure that information referred to
above is widely disseminated and made readily available to members of the
public through various means, including print, electronic and online sources
and at the offices of such public institutions. Proceedings may be
instituted by any person entitled to the right of access to compel public
institutions to comply with the provisions of the Act.
Since the passage into law, the FOIA has become a major focus of the media
and other Rights practitioners in Nigeria. It is a widely held belief that
FOIA makes both government and private institution serving public functions
accountable. This is because perhaps freedom of information is the
cornerstone in promoting democratic participation and good governance. It is
indicative that for a democracy to answer its name it must embrace the
spirit of free press in principle and practice because democracy entails
respect and promotion of peoples rights and freedoms.
Like every other Law, the question of applicability has become paramount.
While it is one thing to assent the Act into Law, it is another to have it
fully implemented. The question of the localization of the Act in most
states has become a subject of litigation. Many individuals who wish to take
advantage of the law to access information have been met with serious road
blocks. However, it must be noted that the courts in most instances have
resolved the issues in favour of the members of the public. For example, on
November 18, 2013, Justice S.A Akinteye of the Oyo State High Court stated
that "the application of the Act is for the entire federation; therefore it
does not need to be domesticated by any state before taking effect in all
states across the federation." Similarly, Justice Agishi of the Federal High
Court Enugu Division stated thus "the FOIA is applicable to both federal and
state institutions and that public officers of the states are also subject
to the Act". She further stated that the FOIA covers the whole of Nigerian
States like the EFCC Act, among others and that its aim is to encourage
accountability, transparency, and rule of law, stating that the beauty of
the Act is that it places public interest above personal interest.
Low level of awareness within the general population about the existence of
Freedom of Information Act and how to use it is among the factors inhibiting
its effective implementation and enforcement. With widespread ignorance
about its existence, only an insignificant number of people end up using
them. Even among relatively well-educated and otherwise sophisticated
members of the society, there is only very superficial knowledge of the law,
what it seeks to achieve and how they can take advantage of it. Much of the
public discussion about freedom of information laws gives the impression
that it is no more than a guarantee of media freedom. A major challenge is
how to ensure that ordinary people have a fair knowledge of this law, the
procedures and conditions outlined in them, the remedies available in the
event of a denial of access to information, and most importantly, the
potential impact of the law on their lives. However, the use of this right
to freedom of information must be cautioned and at the same time encouraged,
for instance for the fight against corruption to succeed in Nigeria,
citizens, ordinary citizens must have the right to ask and receive answers
about activities of their representatives and public officers must be held
accountable for their omissions and actions. The caution of such use
therefore must be encouraged as journalists must vet their information
before publishing it in whatever medium. They must stick to and observe the
tenets and ethics of the profession and also comply with international best
practices and be careful not to persecute public officers or government
agencies performing their constitutional duties. They must ensure that they
scrutinize every piece of information at their disposal before publishing
it. Individuals and organizations must be careful not to be guilty of
defamation in the quest to exercise their freedom of information.
It must be noted that the Act is geared towards ensuring transparency and
accountability and not to promote chaos and blackmail. Those who intend to
use these medium must ensure a great deal of discretion is used in the
process of the use of such rights.
In conclusion, Justice Abiodun Adebara states as follows: "Everyone has a
right to access information or records in the custody of public institutions
(which includes relevant private entities), irrespective of the form in
which such information or records are kept. people don't have to provide any
reason for requesting information or records. The Public institutions are
statutorily obliged to create, keep, organize, and maintain
records/information about their set up, structure, operations, et al, in a
manner that facilitates public access to information."
The right to information has a crucial role in ensuring that citizens are
better informed about the people they are electing and their activities
while in government. Democracy is enhanced when people are meaningfully
engage with their institutions of governance and roots their judgments on
the basis of facts and evidence, rather than just empty promises and
meaningless political slogan. The right to information has a crucial role in
ensuring that citizens are better informed about the people they are
electing and their activities while in government. Democracy is enhanced
when people meaningfully engage their institutions of governance and roots
their judgments on the basis of facts and evidence, rather than just empty
promises and meaningless political slogan.
No comments:
Post a Comment