By A.A. Fenty

-The Freedom of Information Challenge

Admittedly – perhaps regrettably – I did not pay much attention, or interest, when the issue of Freedom of Information legislation gained a degree of national momentum two years ago.

Well, I had occasion – and good reason – to correct my lapse just a few days ago. The issue resonated amongst participants at a Media and Parliament Workshop, with robust vigour. Naturally, the national media highlighted the issue through its print and electronic outlets. What with the sentiment, the emotive elements and the vast array of implications arising from the debate, I, a former Government Chief Information Officer, a Public Relations “practitioner” and one on the periphery of journalism, just had to be interested – somewhat intimately.

So for the layman, now justifiably pre-occupied with the daily challenges of living in this land, I will now present aspects of the subject. Hopefully in such a manner that will help the most indifferent of citizens to appreciate how the Freedom of Information law will eventually influence personal activity and lives – and national interests and behaviour. We’re all never too old to learn. Right?

FOI – WHAT AND WHY
But what is this “Freedom of Information” actually all about? Essentially, and simply, it is the call for legislation to institutionalise – by definition, direction, regulation, conditions and enforcement – citizens’ right to know!

A little long-winded? And to know what? Whatever Party you voted for last time, the fact remains that as a citizen of the Republic, you have a right to know just what the government and its state institutions are doing in your name and on your behalf – the latter sometimes, allegedly. As the recent Workshop – in the majority – argued: if the public must know and participate in decisions that will affect their lives, they must enjoy an enforced right to know – to know facts and figures, conditions of certain conclusions, statistics and their meanings related to population investments, budgetary allocations, about their representatives’ public earnings, taxes, assets, how the national patrimony is being managed. Oh man, the list is long. But why is this right important? When fuel and medicines, recreation and education, are more personal priorities and concerns?

Precisely because those concerns (might) emanate from the abilities or failure of those in employed authority – paid for by you – to deliver, one way or the other. Governments, especially those Administrations claiming that they superintend “Democracies”, are expected to legislate their citizens’ freedom to/of information, rights. However, not many governments – democratic or not, seem to be comfortable with, or in any hurry, doing so. There is some fear of the people and their detractors knowing too much. The fear is linked to a perceived erosion of authority, power, the status of the holder of national confidentialities and secrets.
Little wonder then that our own President’s Spokesman was swift to denounce (almost) the positions taken and advice given to our parliamentarians and media by the invited Commonwealth law-makers and their colleague F-O-I consultants.
****

DEMOCRACY’S CLEAN-AIR OXYGEN

Without naming either the overseas or local contributors to last week’s Workshop Debate, I’ll quote the observations that impressed – even enlightened – me. Here goes – with a few excerpts as I commit to keeping this issue alive over coming months, relatively new convert that I am now.

Information, like knowledge, is power and the right to access it, either from government or private sources, is now so treasured by free thinking citizens that officialdom with nothing to fear or hide has guaranteed access by legislation. In fact, many of societies’ stakeholders – from individual citizens, whether farmer, entrepreneur or attorney, to representative groups, now grasp fully the value of this civil right, the freedom of information. For “the fundamental premise … is that governments, for example, hold information not for themselves, but as a service for the people. Those citizens therefore have a democratic right to access that information.” Given a few exceptions and/or conditions.

Currently, concerned citizens here are interested in just why, what and how government is conducting the business of managing national assets. All very valid and justifiable requests to know certain information. Access to information is fundamental to transparency and accountability. Information invites scrutiny. Scrutiny stymies corruption. In some genuinely democratic societies corruption’s exposure removes officials. And brings down governments! Little wonder some governments take time, much much time to guarantee freedom of information by legislation. Non-justiciable Constitutional Statements of Intent have to do for some weary populations.
******
EXCEPTIONS, PRIVACY …

Naturally, a government’s responsibility to our sovereignty; its duty to protect and defend the integrity of the State, as well as the individual right to privacy, which is not destabilizing or offensive to the Greater Good, must also be guaranteed. Freedom of Information law must therefore accommodate “A regime of legitimate exceptions”.

I‘ll return to this issue frequently. I admit to being late in terms of advocating the fearlessness and maturity for those in the Corridors of Power to enact this legislation. Now aware as I am of the explanations, reasons and excuses proferred for the time being taken “to get there”, I know too how far we as citizens should be guaranteed answers to questions about tenders and bidding, the strength of the GDF, how many doctors taxpayers employ, the profits of public utilities, who leases our forests, when casinos’ licences are granted and the rainfall figures.

I’ll understand if I can’t be told when the Police will launch surprise raids. I don’t want the right to know my Member of Parliament’s Bedroom affairs or his latest medical complaint. But I should know the state of his Tax Payments as a public representative. Much, much more to come but I hope I’ve captured your FOI interest.

UNTIL …
* Well if the brand-new Guyana Times newspaper gets government ads, as a virtual unknown, so should the Stabroek. Right?

* The GRA/Polar beer probe is about to allow the President to honour his public pledge.
* I concede. I confess: Barack Obama’s endorsement has astounded me. Tributes to young and old America for handing the African-European American – the Mulatto – the honour. Honour to the Super Delegates too. One thing in that system is a wee bit puzzling, however: Hilary won more people’s popular, actual votes! Oh well …

*Name five legacies you want Carifesta Ten To Leave Us.
* “Waiting to commit a felony?” Next week.
* Out Who!? Chanderpaul?

’Til Next Week!

Comments? allanafenty@yahoo.com