RIGHT TO KNOW DAY

Today (28 September 2007) is International Right to Know Day and this will be marked by a march and speeches in a hotel in Manzini. The event will be jointly organized by the Media Institute for Southern Africa – Swaziland Chapter (MISA) and the Southern African Journalists Association (SAJA).

This year marks the 5th International Right to Know Day, a day which was established to mark the founding on 28 September 2002 of the global Freedom of Information Advocates Network. This is the second year that International Right to Know Day has been marked in Swaziland.

The aim of International Right to Know Day is to raise awareness of every individual's right of access to government-held information: the right to know how elected officials are exercising power and how taxpayers’ money is being spent. Freedom of information advocates have used the day to share ideas, strategies and success stories about the development of freedom of information laws and the goals of open government.

Reading the above aim of the International Right to Know Day makes sad reading for us in Swaziland because it reminds us of how far we have to go before we can meet the International Right to Know Day standards.

To begin with, of course, we are not a democracy and as subjects of King Mswati III we have no rights to information. The Swazi Constitution that came into force in 2006 allows for freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, but in practice we have none of these things. The media in Swaziland is mostly controlled by the government and the king, through the government, can decide what is broadcast on air and what is not.

Freedom of assembly doesn’t exist. Political parties are banned and it is difficult to form meaningful trade unions. Elections will take place next year, but if they are anything like the last elections that took place in 2003 they will be bogus. Last time around the international community didn’t even bother to send election observers to Swaziland as monitors to ensure the elections were free and fair: nobody outside Swaziland expected them to be so there was no point.

At first glance there is a glimmer of hope on the freedom of information front here in Swaziland. Earlier this year a draft Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Bill was published. This was one of a raft of bills concerning media that was published at the same time.

A Commonwealth consultant and Swazi ‘stakeholders’ met to discuss the finer details of the bill earlier this year.

The bill says its first objective is to ‘encourage a culture of openness, transparency and accountability in public bodies by providing for access to information held by these bodies in order to enable every citizen to fully exercise and protect their constitutional right of freedom of expression.’

As I said above this seems a positive move ‘at first glance’ but if you look more closely you can see how bogus the operation is. To begin with the bill was not created within Swaziland and pays no attention to the dual legal system of formal and traditional laws we have here. In fact, the consultant seems to have taken a look at some bills that already exist in South Africa and copied parts of them out into this new Swazi bill.

Calling Swaziland a ‘republic’ (as in ‘Republic of South Africa’) as the consultant does at one point in the bill (when as we know Swaziland is an autocratic monarchy) rather gave the game away.

The stakeholders’ meetings that were scheduled to discuss the bill were not successful. At one three-day meeting in March 2007, so few interested parties turned up they spent some time discussing whether to abandon the meeting altogether.

Most conspicuous by their absence at the meeting were the traditionalists. One stakeholder even went so far as to say without the traditionalists present the whole meeting was ‘useless’.

In Swaziland nothing will change without the approval of the traditionalists and if you want proof of this just look at the way the implementation of the 2006 constitution has been stalled by them.

So, Swaziland has a long way to go. If you want to learn more about freedom of information, here are 10 principles as set out by the Open Society Justice Initiative.


1. Access to information is a right of everyone. Anyone may request information, regardless of nationality or profession. There should be no citizenship requirements and no need to justify why the information is being sought.

2. Access is the rule – secrecy is the exception! All information held by government bodies is public in principle. Information can be withheld only for a narrow set of legitimate reasons set forth in international law and also codified in national law.

3. The right applies to all public bodies. The public has a right to receive information in the possession of any institution funded by the public and private bodies performing public functions, such as water and electricity providers.

4. Making requests should be simple, speedy, and free.Making a request should be simple. The only requirements should be to supply a name, address and description of the information sought. Requestors should be able to file requests in writing or orally. Information should be provided immediately or within a short timeframe. The cost should not be greater than the reproduction of documents.

5. Officials have a duty to assist requestorsPublic officials should assist requestors in making their requests. If a request is submitted to the wrong public body, officials should transfer the request to the appropriate body.

6. Refusals must be justified. Governments may only withhold information from public access if disclosure would cause demonstrable harm to legitimate interests, such as national security or privacy. These exceptions must be clearly and specifically defined by law. Any refusal must clearly state the reasons for withholding the information.

7. The public interest takes precedence over secrecy. Information must be released when the public interest outweighs any harm in releasing it. There is a strong presumption that information about threats to the environment, health, or human rights, and information revealing corruption, should be released, given the high public interest in such information.

8. Everyone has the right to appeal an adverse decision. All requestors have the right to a prompt and effective judicial review of a public body’s refusal or failure to disclose information.

9. Public bodies should proactively publish core information. Every public body should make readily available information about its functions and responsibilities, without need for a request. This information should be current, clear, and in plain language.

10. The right should be guaranteed by an independent body. An independent agency, such as an ombudsperson or commissioner, should be established to review refusals, promote awareness, and advance the right to access information.