RTI for the masses

Right to Information (RTI) laws enhance transparency and accountability, thus reducing the opportunities for corruption. Nevertheless, empirical evidence of the impact of RTI laws remains scarce. In general, several studies have found that access to information is positively correlated to control of corruption, but the actual impact of RTI laws seems to depend on a series of other factors.

As demonstrated by several studies, the RTI law alone can have a positive impact and help in the solution of specific cases, but it is unlikely to bring sustainable change if not effectively implemented and accompanied of other measures, such as guaranteed freedom of press and association, effective checks and balances mechanisms, including the prosecution and dismissal of public officials found to be involved in corruption, and coherent policy responses to problems detected in service delivery.

In addition, cases of successful implementation of RTI laws requires a strong leadership and political will as well as the establishment of independent and well-resourced oversight institutions, a clear legal framework and appeal mechanisms, training and capacity building of public officials, and awareness raising activities to inform citizens, civil society, the media and companies on how to exercise their right to know. This is where Sri Lanka has to get its act together.

It is critical that public officials are involved early in the process of enactment of RTI laws to facilitate the paradigm shift from secrecy to openness. Awareness raising, training and capacity building is thus instrumental so that officials understand the law, and can have their information management and dissemination skills improved. 

In many countries, the lack of awareness of RTI is still a reality even years after the enactment of the law. For instance, in India, more than 30% of rural public information officers surveyed in 2013 did not know the provisions of the RTI law. In Bangladesh, the majority of public officials are still not aware of the law. As a result, many of them refuse to accept RTI requests from citizens.

Awareness raising and training are usually provided by dedicated institutions responsible for overseeing the implementation of the law. They focus on making sure that all public officials are aware of their obligations and duties under the law.

In Brazil, the office of the Comptroller General conducted a survey prior to the enactment of the RTI law to investigate public officials’ views with regard to access to information. Based on the results of the survey, guidelines and trainings have been developed to support the implementation of the law. The body is also responsible for supporting local level officials in implementing the law and a series of trainings targeted to these officials are being conducted. The Office also offers online courses for public officials at all levels.

The results have been positive: in the first six months of implementation (the law came into force in 2012), over 460,000 requests were made to federal bodies, with 85 percent being responded to positively – this is assessed as very encouraging both in terms of citizen’s participation and officials’ responses.

In addition, implementation of the law can benefit from the appointment of information officers or the creation of similar positions, where a civil servant is officially responsible for dealing with RTI requests For instance; RTI laws in Mexico and Peru require the appointment of designated information officers in each public body at effort the Sri Lankan Government hopes to mirror but it still has long road to travel before RTI reaches the masses.