Vnaguard
13 October 2008
editorial
Nine years after the Freedom of Information bill, FoI bill, has walked the chambers of the National Assembly, up to the presidential villa and back, new notches of freedom have been added to the version that the National Assembly wants to make into law.
It is unlikely the bill would become law in any form soon, not with the insertion of new clauses that have further deadened the chances of the proposed law making any meaningful impact on governance.
Many Nigerians are under the illusion of governments' oft-expressed desire to run transparent operations and submit their conduct to the scrutiny of the public.
All the talks about fighting corruption and due process enticed the public with the prospects of the FoI bill being the anchor for programmes that would make governments accountable.
The politicians are showing their fangs. They are also open about their fears. They think that the FoI law would be the media's chance to expose them. The insistence will ensure the FoI is a meaningless law is on full scale. The public must pay adequate attention to the chancery of politicians.
Are the moves new? No, except that the characters propelling them change, or find new reasons for offering the same nine-year-old rejection.
Senate President David Bonaventure Mark ran into a hail of attacks over the recent changes in the bill.
Mark's position is not new. Last June 2, he had said at a public hearing on the bill, "Let everybody get as much information as he wants and if he decides to misuse it, if in the process you libel anybody it should be criminal.
"I think that the bill must properly address the issue of whether you should be allowed to disclose your source or not disclose your source," he had added. He wants all libels to be criminal, our laws provide for civil libel.
Between June and now, the position has further hardened. The Senate Committee on Information has added in Section 2 obtaining a court or security clearance as a condition to use any information.
The Nigerian Guild of Editors described the new clauses as "obnoxious and toxic" and demanded that they should be expunged. Senator Mark thinks the law is for the benefit of the media and is concerned about breaches.
Another way in which the FoI bill has been made ineffective is through the reversal of the provision that imposed the onus on the civil servant to realise the information, or prove to the court why he should not make information public. Under the new provision, it is the person who needs the information who must convince the court why he should get the information.
There is an obsession about the powers this law will grant the media. Many still do not believe the proposed law would also benefit the general public.
It is unfortunate that after nine years, the Senate is on the verge of changing the thrust of the FoI to a law that would restrict availability of information to the public.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 Vanguard. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
