body-container-line-1
14.07.2014 Press Release

Major Concerns On The Right To Information Bill IV

14.07.2014 LISTEN
By Right To Information Coalition, Ghana, July, 2014

Responsibility Of The Minister Under The Right To Information (RTI) Bill:

Clause 53 of the Ghana Right to Information Bill places on the Minister for Justice the responsibility of ensuring the effective implementation of the RTI law when passed. The Minister also has an obligation to conduct public education programmes and provide information for the implementation of the law. Furthermore, the Bill envisages that the Minister for Justice will conduct research into matters affecting the purposes of the law and receive representations from the public in respect of its operation. In the view of the Right to Information Coalition, Ghana, these provision as spelt out in Clause 53(1), (2) and (3) (a) (b) and (c) are problematic for the following reasons:

1. Conflict of Interest:

Under the Ghana Public Service structure, the office of the Minister for Justice is an integral part of the Executive. The Minister for Justice and Attorney General is appointed by the executive, which places the Minister in a clear conflict of interest position with respect to the implementation of the right to information law. As a member of the executive, to whom is the Minister accountable? It is not likely that the Minister will be an independent guardian of the public good in the face of pressure from the appointing authority - the executive. As an arm of government, the Minister may be obliged to obey the state.

The right to information law when passed will seek to transform an old culture of secrecy inherent in our public institutions; given the nature of the legislation, its implementation may witness public resistance to information disclosure. It is our humble view that the Minister for Justice will be unable to transform this radical new culture that the passage of the law will introduce into our public service. Therefore a dedicated institution with dedicated staff is needed to ensure mass public education which will overtime help to change public attitudes and behavior towards requesting and releasing information.

2. Lack of Competency and Capacity:

Just recently, the weaknesses of the Ministry of Justice were brought to the limelight particularly in relation to the judgment debt scandals that riddled, and continue to riddle our dear nation. The Ministry's inability to adequately represent state interests; failure to enter appearances resulting in the payment of huge sums of monies as judgment debts, lack of diligence in handling contracts, poor records keeping and management systems as shown in the case of the sale of the GNPC's drill ship before the Judgment Debts Commission are a proof that the Ministry is seriously challenged. Placing the oversight responsibility of ensuring the implementation of a law such as the RTI law on the Minister for Justice will not only overwhelm the Ministry but will also frustrate the implementation of the law. In fact if the Minister is left to exercise this responsibility, the RTI law will be dead on arrival. It is our view that the ministry lacks the man power, expertise, time and financial resources to enforce compliance with the law by public institutions.

OUR PROPOSAL:

We propose the establishment of an independent oversight mechanism to replace the Minister for Justice

The independent oversight mechanism will oversee the implementation of the RTI law when passed. It will serve as an appellate tribunal to which persons turn to when dissatisfied. This will ensure that the procedures are not expensive or cumbersome. The independent organ will develop over time a body of staff that understand and are sensitive to the demands of citizens' right to information, ensure transparency and increased efficiency in public administration. Specifically, we propose the following to be the functions of the independent oversight mechanism:

The promotion and effective implementation of the right to access of information and may for this purpose issue written guidelines and directives to all public and private bodies/agencies subject to the provisions of the Act;

Monitor and report on compliance by all bodies/agencies subject to the provisions of the Act;

Make recommendations for reform both of a general nature and directed at specific agencies;

Carry out nation-wide public education and popularization of the provisions of the law by disseminating or publicizing the requirements of the law and the rights of the individual under it; and to that end collaborate with the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE), the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) and identifiable civil society stakeholders/organizations;


Receive, inquire into and determine appeals/complaints from aggrieved applicants against the decision or other act of commission or omission of anybody/agency subject to the Act;

Conduct audit compliance with the provisions of the Act by private and public bodies/agencies;

Carry out investigations on its own initiative or upon receipt of an appeal or complaint from the public, into any matter related to the enforcement of the provisions of the Act;

Submit before Parliament not later than the 30th June of each year an annual report of its activities and compliance by all agencies subject to the Act;


Lay before Parliament from time to time such other reports as it deems appropriate and Parliament may debate the report and pass the resolution that it considers fit.;

Train information officers and such other relevant officers on their obligations and powers under the Act;

Refer to the appropriate authorities cases which reasonably disclose evidence of criminal offences committed under the Act for investigation and prosecution;

Initiate research to be conducted into matters affecting the purposes of the Act;

Take such other appropriate measures as the Commission considers necessary to give effect to the provisions of the Act.

body-container-line