WHEN THE Access to Information Act was passed in June 2002, the intention was to "give citizens and other persons a general legal right of access to official government documents which would otherwise be inaccessible." According to the Access to Information Unit, it aimed at an improved and more transparent government; at accountability of government to its people; increased public influence on, and participation in national decision making.
Several groups among civil society, human rights advocates and the media, welcomed this move as a sign of maturity on the part of the Government. It suggested that the Government was now willing to allow the people it served to scrutinise its decisions and actions. We had surmounted a major obstacle in the free flow of information that should be a hallmark of an open society and not one where public officials behaved as if public business was their personal property.
This newspaper has sought to take advantage of the improved access to information in a number of instances. But, increasingly, there have been indications of unease in some government quarters, especially after The Gleaner published information it had received under the act, about Prime Minister P. J. Patterson's overseas travels. Now, government ministries and agencies seem to be employing various measures which, in our view, amounts to attempts to circumvent the law and thereby frustrate efforts at obtaining information and ensuring accountability.
Against the background of scandals that have been brought to public notice, the increasing reluctance raises the prospect that access to information is entering a phase of official denial. It seems to us that that would be tantamount to abrogating the very provisions of the law that was supposed not merely to promote greater transparency but to legalise the very effort to get the information to which the public is entitled.
We do not know to what extent other agencies or persons have sought to get information in accordance with the legal provisions. As a newspaper in the business of accessing and promulgating information, we are keenly aware of the limitations to which that exercise is subject legally. But along with all other interests in this area, we are determined to defend the legal rights to information in the public sector which some agencies seem determined to withhold.
We are aware that one reaction could be an attempt to amend the Access to Information Act that could dilute its effects. That, we submit, would be tantamount to muzzling the press and will be strongly resisted. The act provides that if a government employee "alters or defaces, blocks or erases, destroys or conceals an official document to which the public has a right of access, with the intention of preventing its disclosure, a fine of a maximum of $500,000 or six months imprisonment or both is applicable." We are willing to test it.
We tell our people: "...We are all stakeholders embarking on a quest for a more transparent and participatory democracy... Let us do so believing it can be done..." (Access to Information Unit said in the Access to Information User's Guide 2004).
But this will never work if every request is viewed with suspicion and efforts are made to thwart disclosure.
