[kictanet] Freedom of Information laws/ e- discussion continued

Tue Oct 18 18:14:26 EAT 2011

Great discussion

RTI (Right to Information) may also apply vertically meaning it could apply to individuals or private bodies-corporate or not-for profits who hold information that is essential for the fulfilment of one human rights. For instance, a public-private water company operating in Mavoko will be expected to share information with a resident of Kathiani constituency on water tariffs, quality etc if not such a member can file a request and if denied (mute refusal) then they can move to court to seek the information. They will be seeking restitution of two rights (right to access information, and right to water).

Similarly private bodies that receive substantial public resoources for execution of public service are deemed to fall within the purview of RTI laws.

Apart from keeping in retrievable formats and practively making as much of such information public, public servants/officers have a duty to assist citizens who may not know where to find information they may need which may be held by another public body or a private body.

Happy to respond to any specific concerns and querries listers may have on the subject.

Regards 

HENRY O. MAINA
DIRECTOR
ARTICLE 19 KENYA/EASTERN AFRICA
P O BOX 2653,00100
NAIROBI
TEL:+254 (20) 3862230/2
FAX:+254 (20) 3862231
EMAIL: henry at article19.org

________________________________________
From: kictanet-bounces+henry=article19.org at lists.kictanet.or.ke [kictanet-bounces+henry=article19.org at lists.kictanet.or.ke] on behalf of Kerubo Ombati [kaykerubo at gmail.com]
Sent: 18 October 2011 02:27 PM
To: Henry Maina
Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions
Subject: Re: [kictanet] Freedom of Information laws/ e- discussion continued

The essence of the freedom of information legislation is that it applies vertically, the citizen's rights to demand from the state and not viz a vie other citizens, the citizen can exercise their rights or not,,,its up to them,the law does not confer any responsibility on them.

The issue of a mother denying her child access to polio vaccine is an issue of children's rights.

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Harry Delano <harry at comtelsys.co.ke<mailto:harry at comtelsys.co.ke>> wrote:

Many thanks Kurubo/Grace,

I suppose then, in light of the foregoing, State must at all costs avail "information" under it's possession.

Citing the "Freedom of information" clause within this context however, makes it imperative for State to
do so within universally adopted benchmarks. But within  the same context, what is the citizen's
responsibility?

I could check this out. But does the clause in the same vein confer a mandatory responsibility upon the
citizen to ensure their exercise of this "Right to access" does not go to waste, or does he/she have the
freedom to exercise this right/liberty liberally.

One can argue that for instance,  a mother who fails to vaccinate her child against polio, because of "failure"
to access information as opposed to "lack" of access to information should be held responsible. Is this
enforceable in law..? How?

Lastly but not least, State has only a tiny custody of information consumable by the public. I dare say that
a lot of information/knowledge sought after by information consumers fall well outside the State domain.

How do we police those outside, who hoard information desperately needed by consumers...? And what
of those who deliberately avail misleading information/knowledge, including state..?

Harry

________________________________
From: Kerubo Ombati [mailto:kaykerubo at gmail.com<mailto:kaykerubo at gmail.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 12<tel:2011%2012>:35 PM
To: harry at comtelsys.co.ke<mailto:harry at comtelsys.co.ke>
Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions
Subject: Re: [kictanet] Freedom of Information laws/ e- discussion continued

Hi Listers,

Harry, the 'Freedom of Information' clause in the constitution is designed to give citizens free access to public information held by the state,it generally does not impose a positive obligation on the state to impart such information on the individual.

However,in certain instances, failure to provide the information to an individual can be considered to constitute an interference with their private rights and a breach of the state's human rights obligations.

Although, freedom of information legislation is reluctant to impose a positive obligation on the state,the considered view as adopted is that the freedom of information legislation should impose a duty on the state to impart information to the public.

Regards,
Kerubo

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Harry Delano <harry at comtelsys.co.ke<mailto:harry at comtelsys.co.ke>> wrote:
Hey Grace & Kerubo,

Thanks for your summary overview. I wonder aloud whether it should only be the state that maintains this monopoly over
accessibility to basic information in as far as "Freedom of information" is concerned.

Whereas state has the instruments it can use to either promote or curtail such freedoms, I suppose it would also be safe
to say that in quite a number of instances, state might be deemed a "lame duck".

How about a remote Island sequestered somewhere, about 200 miles off the shores of Lake Victoria with no basic access
to communication?

Would the populace there's lack thereof, of basic information access be considered an infringement on this fundamental
right/liberty by the state...?

Harry

________________________________
From: kictanet-bounces+harry=comtelsys.co.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:comtelsys.co.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke> [mailto:kictanet-bounces+harry<mailto:kictanet-bounces%2Bharry>=comtelsys.co.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:comtelsys.co.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke>] On Behalf Of Grace Githaiga
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 12<tel:2011%2012>:57 AM
To: harry at comtelsys.co.ke<mailto:harry at comtelsys.co.ke>
Cc: kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
Subject: [kictanet] Freedom of Information laws/ e- discussion continued

Thanks Harry Delano, Washington, Cleophas and Kerubo.

Harry you raise a good question on what these terms mean and whether they are interchangeable.

Washington, you make an important point about freedom of expression/speech not being absolute, and Cleophas affirms your point.

Thanks Kerubo for the definitions. Yes, freedom of information simply means  the freedom to get certain basic information held by the state, which can enable one to for example bring a case of human rights violation or any other cause.

Freedom of expression can mean many things, say freedom to air your ideas, take a stand, artistic creativity--simply freedom to express how you feel. And of course as Washington and Cleophas rightly point out, all these freedoms are subject to limitations and therefore not carte blanche.

In this case then:

  *   Is there conflict between laws on freedom of information and what citizens demand/require?

Lets hear it from you.

Rgds
Grace

_______________________________________________
kictanet mailing list
kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet

Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kaykerubo%40gmail.com

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.