Definition:
Number of countries that adopt and implement constitutional, statutory and/or policy guarantees for public access to information.
The purpose of this indicator is to report the total of number of countries that adopted legal guarantees on ATI, as well as the main tendencies in the implementation of these guarantees, which are presented in global aggregates.
Based on the definition above, the indicator has two components:
1. Adoption
2. Implementation
Under each component, key questions were identified based on what can be called “Principles of Access to Information”, and which highlight essential components for effective implementation of Access to Information implementation at the country level. These Principles are synthesized from existing frameworks and documents recognised internationally. For the purpose of this survey, the principles of relevance are as follows:
1. Legal frameworks for Access to Information
2. Limited exemptions
3. Oversight mechanism
4. Appeals mechanism
5. Record keeping and reporting
Each question values between 0 and 2. Upon the completion of the survey, a country can get a total score of 0-9. The total score of each country will not be assigned to any level category (e.g.: low, medium or high). However, it will contribute to global aggregates.
More details on the computation method are under the section Methodology.
Concepts:
- Access to Information
“Public access to information” is based upon the established human right to the fundamental freedom of expression (FOE) and association. States are duty-bearers for this right and measuring the fulfilment of this duty allows for assessment of progress.
In terms of defining what is being measured, Access to Information (ATI) has two principle components: the obligation for states to have a legal framework that is also implemented in practice, that:
- Entitles public to request access to information (documents and other information recorded in any format) and to respond to such requests in a timely fashion.
- Obliges authorities to ensure that information of public interest is put into the public domain proactively, without the need for requests.
- Right to Information
The right of access to public information (RTI) is a component of the fundamental right of freedom of expression as set forth by Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), and the subsequent International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. These state that the fundamental right of freedom of expression encompasses the freedom "to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers” (our italics). Seeking and receiving is the dimension of the right that is immediately relevant to this SDG indicator, with the right to impart information and ideas constituting the other side of the coin.
RTI is an umbrella term that refers to the legal right to access information held by public bodies. It is often used in the same way as terms such as Freedom of Information (FOI).
- Implementation
This refers primarily to efforts to give practical effect to the provisions of the law, policy or regulation. Implementation thus designates government bodies providing information to the public (on request as well as proactively). Implementation is important to ensure that the benefits of the law, policy or regulation are realized.
- Monitoring
Monitoring the implementation of access to information refers to the supervision and examination conducted by the dedicated Access to Information oversight institution to ensure effective application of the legal guarantee(s). This includes a role in assessing efforts made by public bodies with a view to advance access to information in the country.
- Enforcement
Enforcement of compliance with Access to Information legal guarantee(s) refers to the actions of obliging adherence by duty-bearers to the respective requirements and the implementation of sanctions when violations are found. Enforcement is a disciplinary function that seeks to ensure that there are consequences to the violation of rules, involving a set of tools used to punish breaches of laws and regulations, and to deter future violations.
- Mediation
Mediation is a negotiation facilitated by a neutral third party (a mediator). Mediation does not involve decision making by the neutral third party. Unlike a judge or an arbitrator, therefore, the mediator is not a decision-maker. In mediation, the disputing parties work with the mediator to resolve their disputes. The mediator assists the parties in reaching their own decision on a settlement of the dispute by supervising the exchange of information and the bargaining process.
- Dedicated oversight
This specialist function covers the process of supervision, monitoring, evaluation of performance and review, to ensure compliance with laws, regulations and policies. It entails assessing and enforcing implementation. Oversight of implementation is thus different to executing the actual implementation itself in regard to the direct provision of information.
An oversight institution refers to the body charged with ensuring Oversight and therefore accountability for the implementation of ATI. The same body or another may also do appeals, although appeals is a distinct function from oversight and are sometimes done by a separate body. This is why some countries, there exists more than one oversight institution, depending on the different tasks performed.
The oversight function can be exercised by the following (indicative) institutions:
- Information Commission/ Commissioner;
- Data Protection or Privacy Commission / Commissioner
- Human Rights Commission
- Ombudsman
- Department/ Ministry/ Agency
- Appeals
An appeal is an application for a decision (or lack of a decision) relating to a request for information, to be reviewed by the Access to Information oversight institution that is tasked with this. Appeals normally involve requests to reconsider failures by duty-bearers to provide information. Ideally, an independent and impartial review body will be established with the power to compel disclosure. While in some jurisdictions, courts may be an effective alternative to a review body, they can be slow and expensive, and therefore may prevent many people from seeking review. Appeals to a court should normally be a last resort once institutional appeal processes are exhausted, and this realm is treated as outside the scope of this indicator.
- Limited exemptions
Exemptions (or exceptions) allow the withholding of certain categories of information. Limited exemptions mean that such withholding must be based on narrow, proportionate, necessary and clearly defined limitations. Exceptions should apply only where there is a risk of substantial harm to the protected interest and where the harm is greater the overall public interest in having access to the information. Bodies should provide reasons for any refusal to provide access to information.
Several permissible exemptions include:
- national security;
- international relations;
- public health and safety;
- the prevention, investigation and prosecution of legal wrongs;
- privacy;
- legitimate commercial and other economic interests;
- management of the economy;
- fair administration of justice and legal advice privilege;
- conservation of the environment; and
- legitimate policy making and other operations of public bodies.
- Record-keeping and reporting
Record-keeping is part of a records management system, which plays an important role in fostering accountability and good governance. Without adequate and reliable records of requests and/or appeals received and how they are processed, it would be difficult to measure, and report progress on access to information. In the implementation of access to information, reporting is an essential tool for transparency and accountability purposes, as well as for gathering evidence and data in mapping any gaps and needs as a precondition for making targeted improvements.
Comments and limitations:
The indicator allows for reporting the total number of countries that adopted constitutional, statutory and/or policy guarantees for public access to information globally. Data on the implementation of these guarantees comes from entities that responded to UNESCO survey.
In some countries, the oversight institutions for Access to Information that are the entities best placed to provide data for this survey, directly or indirectly, might not have an explicit monitoring role, or may have weak record-keeping situations. Hence, they might not be able to provide detailed information that could help contextualize the analysis.
The indicator does not enter into whether the national measures taken do lead to further impacts. It focuses on the implementation of the regulatory environment and on the mandate and supporting systems that is are preconditions for effective implementation.
|