By Spencer Mogapi
Mogapi is chairman of the Botswana Editors Forum.
Over the last few weeks the nation has been treated to varying and conflicting versions of what Freedom of Information Act is, who stands to benefit from it and why the country does not need such a law. During that time extraordinarily bizarre reasons have also been advanced on why Botswana is not ready for such a law.
As Botswana Editors Forum (BEF) we would like to join the debate with the hope of not only clearing the air but also busting quite a few myths that if not addressed could end up passing for the real truths. We note with concern that government response and government behavior in the debate so far has not been altogether tidy.
Instead of engaging the Bill and make it as inclusive as possible so that it could win everyone’s support, our government has chosen to look for reasons to discredit and not support a law that has proved very noble in other democracies. Attempts to engage government have so far proved almost futile, not least because our leaders have through and through been negotiating in bad faith.
Endless goal post shifting on the part of the Minister of Presidential Affairs, Mokgweetsi Masisi and his officials has proved particularly disheartening. Initially the Office of the President had contended that they had no problem with Freedom of Information Bill for as long as it was preceded by Data Protection Act. When it became clear that the two laws were actually complimentary to one another and not meant to police the other as government had earlier alleged, they change track and started making unsubstantiated insinuations that the Bill as presently before Parliament does not meet the general drafting standards of Botswana Government Laws.
When it was pointed out to them that one of the key architects of the Bill in as far as its drafting is concerned is a retired Deputy Attorney General who was for many years head of the drafting division at the Attorney Chambers, the Ministry of Presidential Affairs instead of conceding, changed the story yet again and argued that it is not clear from the Bill what amounts to “public interest” as referred to in the Bill.
As BEF we find this assertion particularly deceitful and insincere. A casual perusal of many of the already existing Laws of Botswana shows that many of the country’s statutes are replete with reference to “public interest.” Feigning ignorance and or ambiguity on what “public interest” means is therefore patently dishonest and disingenuous. Honesty, we want to point is an elementary principle of any debate.
Given their failure to say just what it is that they are not happy with, clearly Government is irritated at being upstaged on so important a law by a member of parliament, who is also from opposition. It does not seem to matter to our government that before coming up with this law the said Member of Parliament had to seek express permission from the Speaker and other Members of Parliament. All that matters, it would seem to us is that political partisanship, pettiness and unyielding egos have been allowed to take the better of our government.
That we think is unfortunate as it goes against the spirit of nation building. Despite all the misleading emphasis that Government has delighted in placing on the Bill as a footwork of the media, we want to point out that Freedom of Information Law is meant for public at large.
Media Practitioners, as and when they become beneficiaries of this law are only a tiny proportion of the overall target.
Freedom of Information Act enhances accountability. It enhances interaction between the rulers and the ruled. It reduces the gap between the voter and those in power. It goes without saying that by embracing this law Botswana will enhance its stature among the progressive countries of the world. It is normal that Members of Parliament would seek clarification on certain aspects of any law brought before them. For that reason the Botswana Editors Forum calls on the Government to allow the law to go through the usual processes and get it interrogated as is customary in our democracy.
As a suggestion to bridge the gap between those for and against the Bill, the BEF is of the view that the Bill be subjected to cross-party pre- legislative scrutiny if that could in anyway help engender consensus.
The BEF Forum supports the Bill, first and foremost because it enhances accountability and transparency. More crucially, the Forum stands behind the Bill because it promises to enhance citizen empowerment and citizen participation in the affairs of the state.For their part, the Office of President should desist from grandstanding. Instead of coming up with all sorts of misinformation and disinformation tactics about this law, Masisi should interrogate the Bill, something which he clearly has not done despite the fact that he has had more than one and a half years to do just that.
Filed under: Latest Features