Maravi

Outdated, empty arguments over FOI Bill

Outdated, empty arguments over FOI Bill
By Editor
Sunday November 04, 2007 [03:00]

IT is regrettable that a country which professes to be a democracy is failing to make progress in making laws that enhance openness and transparency in public affairs. What is more regrettable is that those who are expected to have a fair understanding of the need for accountability and transparency in public affairs appear to be the biggest obstacle towards a more open system of government.

The arguments by Namwala UPND member of parliament Major Richard Chizyuka that the media should exercise responsibility before the Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill is taken back to Parliament are not only outdated, but are also very misleading because they do not reflect the reality on the ground.

From his arguments in his opposition to the FOI Bill, Maj Chizyuka has shown us that he does not fully understand the issue at hand because he is confusing himself with a lot of things. He is trying to find a solution for a problem which does not exist. The things that Maj Chizyuka is talking about are in no way directly related to freedom of information legislation and he should find better reasons for his anti-freedom of information stance instead of boring us with misleading and rather outdated arguments. In case he is not aware, we can draw Maj Chizyuka to existing laws in terms of protection of people who feel unfairly treated by the media or by journalists.

For example, if any journalist or media organisation insults anyone, libel laws are in our statute books and they can be applied firmly and fully as long as those with grievances can prove their case. There are many other laws - some of them absolutely ridiculous - that already limit our work as journalists and they actually need to be expunged from our statutes if we are to operate a little more freely.

On top of that, there are ethical standards, set either by individual media organisations or by groups or associations of media organisations, which bind the media and journalists to certain minimum standards of operation. It is therefore misleading for Maj Chizyuka to suggest that the media enjoys a free reign in this country. It is totally false for anyone to suggest that the media in this country operates without responsibility to the society it serves. And when we say Maj Chizyuka is confusing a lot of things over the FOI debate, this is exactly what we mean.

But we shall not waste our time discussing non-issues being brought out by less progressive lawmakers. We need to start making progress as far as FOI legislation is concerned because we firmly believe that legislation of the right to information is something that is long overdue. And as we have already said, it is actually regrettable that we find ourselves in a position where we are still talking about taking the FOI Bill to Parliament when this law should have by this time been put in place.

But as long as we have people who think like Maj Chizyuka in Parliament, we can be sure that very little progress will be made regarding this matter. For as long as we have lawmakers who do not fully appreciate that such a law is essentially for improvement of the running of government and not just to allow 'irresponsible' journalists reasonably unlimited access to information, not a lot of movement will be made towards the realisation of a more accountable and transparent system of government.

We know that the FOI Bill has faced much resistance not necessarily because of issues of security or privacy as it has been largely argued by those opposed to it. We say this because the FOI Bill, in its current format, has sufficiently taken care of these concerns.
Rather, the resistance has much to do with the fear by those in government that a lot more light will be made to shine on their activities, on the work of their government. Unfortunately, most of our politicians believe that such a law has the potential to weaken the government when the opposite is actually true. We have always argued that the necessity of laws which allow the public to have access to government held records or information has much more to do with the need for transparency and openness. If anything, openness has the potential of enhancing public confidence in the government and therefore safeguarding its integrity.

We do not have to repeat the fact that transparency is key when it comes to deterring and detecting corruption. And we believe that we can arrive at greater openness and transparency by guaranteeing the public the right of access to official information - freedom of information law, in short.

The FOI law is necessary not just because the public should exercise their right to access information but largely because it promotes openness and in an open society, the authorities are expected to be accountable to the public. In a democratic system, it is necessary that the public has an idea of how those in government are making decisions on its behalf. Besides, let us not forget that openness is a precondition for attaining the sense of freedom that one should enjoy in a truly democratic society.

Yes, there are still forces opposed to freedom of information legislation because they have their own unjustifiable and unreasonable fears; they have narrow interests to protect. But we need to start matching our democratic credentials with policies or laws that enhance freedom, transparency and accountability.

On our part as journalists, we know that freedom of information legislation is an unavoidable necessity because once in place, we believe it will go a long way in terms of helping us serve the public better in the interest of truth, democracy and free flow of information and ideas. And because we fully appreciate the significance of such legislation, we will not allow self-serving politicians to be misleading the public with their outdated and hollow arguments over the FOI Bill.

Labels: EDITORIAL, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL

posted by MrK @ 4:33 AM