Freedom of Information (FOI) legislation or Open records are laws which set rules on access to information or records held by government bodies. In general, such laws define a legal process by which government information is required to be available to the public. Over 70 countries around the world have implemented some form of such legislation.

In some countries like Bulgaria, the courts actually facilitate the implementation of such laws. A related concept is open meetings legislation, which allows access to government meetings, not just to the records of them.

The introduction of the FOI Bill several years ago in this country promised a fresh bastion of hope not only for the downtrodden, but more importantly, for the socio-political and economic repositioning of our nation. But about a decade now, we’ve watched with shock and disbelief as the Bill eviscerated as if it were some idle political pawn in the hands of our legislators. No Bill in the history of this nation has been subjected to so much political filibustering and pussy-footing as the FOI Bill.

In other realms, FOI legislation is already making tremendous impact. In a report, the global anti-corruption watchdog-Transparency International said, “Corruption flourishes in darkness and so any progress towards opening governments and inter-governmental organization to public scrutiny is likely to advance anti-corruption efforts” The report entitled, “Using the right to Information as an Anticorruption Tool”, focused particularly on the impact of FOI legislation across Eastern Europe-the former communist bloc in which government was a by-word for secrecy and deception. New access to information is making government more accountable and there is a continuing drive to persuade governments across Africa to adopt similar measures.

According to a 2006 FOI Survey around the World by David Banisar and Privacy International, Freedom of information (FOI) is an essential right for every person. It allows individuals and groups to protect their rights. It is an important guard against abuses, mismanagement and corruption. It can also be beneficial to governments themselves – openness and transparency in the decision-making process can improve citizen trust in government actions.

FOI is essential for public participation. Democracy is based on the consent of the citizens and that consent turns on the government informing citizens about their activities and recognising their right to participate. The public is only truly able to participate in the democratic process when they have information about the activities and policies of the government.

Public awareness of the reasons behind decisions can improve support and reduce misunderstandings and dissatisfaction. Individual members of Parliament are also better able to conduct oversight. Confidence in the government is improved if it is known that the decisions will be predicable. FOI laws can improve the enforcement of many other economic and political rights. In India, the FOI laws are used to enforce rations distribution by revealing that food vendors are not providing the government-subsidized food to impoverished citizens. This has resulted in substantial changes in the food distribution system to ensure that citizens are getting their food while vendors are getting adequate compensation.

FOI is considered a key tool in anti-corruption measures as reasons for awarding contracts and other financial transactions must be documented and justified. In India, grassroots social activist groups use the right to know laws to obtain information on local public works projects and reveal the amounts said to have been paid at public meetings where community members are then asked if the projects have been completed, and how much they were paid. These have revealed many instances in which actual payments were less than the amount that had been recorded as given to people who had died and supplied to projects never completed.

In countries that have recently made the transition to democracy, FOI laws allow governments to break with the past and allow society and the victims and their families of abuses to learn what happened and better understand. Almost all newly developed or modified constitutions include a right to access information from government bodies as a fundamental human or civil right.

One of the irrational arguments that have been put forth by the antagonists of the FOI Bill in the National Assembly is the possible new fillips to the media on its conduct of investigative journalism. Restricting access to information deprives the press of the legal authority to publish what they even know is true. But the Bill does not intend to empower the journalists or the wider media industry with such exclusive rights and privileges that will not be available to the rest of the public. And the more the government delays the passage of this Bill; the longer it delays the day of eventual prosperity in this country. In the first instance, the Bill will promote transparency.

The activities of those who complicate information in order to misinform and scuttle investigation will be reduced. Heightened transparency goes hand in hand with credibility and confidence. What it simply means is that there will be heightened trust and confidence in the Nigerian people who more often than not consider politicians, government officials and their cronies’ common thieves because of their inglorious antecedents. It would also help everyone to know if in the cause of investigating corruption, there is a premeditated attempt to witch-hunt anyone under the guise of corruption. British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown is right: …Freedom of Information is the right course because government belongs to the people, not the politicians.

In the light of this, anyone who supports accountability has no choice but to throw his weight behind the FOI Bill and by extension question the sincerity of the legislators probing past regimes on one hand while at the same time throwing away the mechanism through which they can have increased access to such information that they seem to be probing on the other hand.

One of the biggest contradictions in the wake of the FOI Bill is that the legislature in the last dispensation passed the Bill while the President withdrew his assent. However, in this dispensation, the legislators are not willing to discuss the Bill. President Yar Adua may grant his assent if he can match his words with action with respect to his much avowed rule of law and due process, but we doubt if he can transform his policies from mere words to concrete action. His recent administering of the oath of secrecy on his Kitchen Cabinet is a sad pointer to this fact.

That singular act is a big blow to the FOI legislation. Besides, the Legislature through the Senate Committee on Media and Information now intends to severely cripple the bill by amending section 2 of the Bill thus: Every citizen of the Federal Republic of Nigeria has a legally enforceable right to, and shall, on application be given access to any information or record under the control of a government or public institution or private companies performing public functions.

This is provided the disclosure of such information or release of such record(s) shall not compromise national security and that the applicant shall have satisfied a State or Federal High Court of the need for the disclosure of such information or release of such record(s). This proviso is like giving a plastic toy to a child crying of hunger, in need of food, in order to keep the child quiet. The end result is that the FOI law will become useless just like the child cannot eat the toy.

Nigerians must reject the Bill being passed if it is severely watered down by those anti-information legislators who hypocritically make spurious claims of acting in our best interest when actually they are desirous of covering their tracks than coming up with laws that will articulate long-time prosperity for Nigerians. It is a paradox of our times that we hail the victory of democracy while lamenting the fact that our National Assembly – the central institution of democracy is facing a crisis of legitimacy.