Philippines: President Rodrigo Duterte’s Executive Order on Freedom of Information will be effective as of Nov. 25, Rappler reports.
India: Multiple media reports from the two-day RTI Convention.
- The central information commission (CIC) introduces an e-court software which would help in speedy disposal of appeals and complaints. The system offers online filing of appeals, complaints and disposal. As soon an applicant files a complaint with the commission, the system will generate a unique number which can be used to track its status.
- Advocates urge extending the provisions of RTI to non-government sectors by widening the definition of “public money.”
- “Officials should reply to every RTI application irrespective of what kind of information has been sought by the applicant, Home Minister Singh
- Long waiting times exist for appeals are documented in a new study, which also says information commissions impose the penalty for denial of information in only 1.3 per cent of the cases where penalty was imposable.
- “RTI Yashgatha,” a book narrating 62 RTI Act success stories is published.
- A general overview.
China: “Now is Time to Improve China’s Mixed Transparency Scorecard,” writes Hu Shuli, the chief editor of Caixin Media.
United Kingdom: FOIMan summarizes the government’s Triennial Review of the Information Commissioner’s Office. The long-awaited report concludes that:
- the ICO still has an important role to play
- it needs to adjust to the challenges of developing technology
- it should still report to a sponsoring department in government rather than the Commissioner becoming an officer of Parliament
- its structure should change to a board of commissioners – in line with a recommendation made by the Leveson Inquiry
- the government and ICO should quickly agree a more sustainable funding approach especially for DP activities.
Trend Alert: Diplomats are increasingly using WhatsApp during international negotiations, report Julian Borger, Jennifer Rankin and Kate Lyons in The Guardian.
Malawi: The Center for Development of People (CEDEP), a local non-governmental organization, registers its disappointment and displeasure with the conduct of the President Peter Mutharika for attacks on the media and “dilly-dallying and playing games with the Access to Information Bill.”
Australia: The Australian National Audit Office has begun a performance audit on the administration of the FOIA, writes Peter Timmins of Open and Shut.
Australia: The Australian Government’s Productivity Commission releases a draft report that highlights the costs of not using government data. One conclusion is that “a wide range of more than 500 secrecy and privacy provisions in Commonwealth legislation plus other policies and guidelines impose considerable limitations on the availability and use of identifiable data.”
Turkey: “Promising New Ruling On The Limits Of Administrative Bodies’ Discretion Regarding The Right To Access To Information,” is the headline on an article by Gönenç Gürkaynak.
Myanmar: “Following a two-day media conference at Rangoon’s Chatrium Hotel earlier this week, many media experts urged the National League for Democracy government to enact a “Right to Information Law” in order to make government data more transparent to the public,” according to an article in Irrawaddy.
Indonesia: “Environmental activists have lambasted the government for refusing to abide by a Central Information Commission’s (KIP) ruling that ordered them to publish a forest cover map in shapefile format,” reports The Jakarta Post.
Bolivia: Espacio Público and others sue for information made regarding mining concessions.
Bahamas: Transparency International and its partner organizations in the Caribbean call on the government of the Bahamas to introduce strong FOI legislation.
Open Data: “The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy’s top data scientist believes open data has the power to identify and begin to help remediate problems facing society, but the data doesn’t mean much without a mission behind it,” according to a Federal Computer Week article.
United States: “Strengthening Government Accountability and Transparency Recommendations to the Next President,” an by Sean Moulton of POGO.
Commentary: An interview by David Sasaki, a program officer at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation who manages a portfolio of grants “that use transparency, participation and accountability interventions to improve public service delivery,” with the Engine Room’s co-founder, Alix Dunn, and Matchbox program director Julia Keseru. Among other comments, a Sasaki critique:
What we regularly call “open government” or “civic tech” is really a conglomeration of (at least) three distinct communities working toward different goals. First was the human rights community that saw Access to Information Laws as mechanisms to gain more information about human rights abuses and corruption by the powerful. Then there was the technology sector that wanted to use government information to help inform the decisions of their users. Finally, there was the development sector wanting to help governments make better policies and decisions while simultaneously applying citizen pressure for better political representation and service delivery.
These three different groups were brought together under the theory that a big tent of diverse actors would be able to accomplish more together. I’m more inclined, however, to side with Harlan Yu and David Robinson’s critique that ambiguity leads to conceptual confusion and unclear strategies. I also think it creates a scenario, as your colleague Zara Rahman has pointed out, where governments are applauded for releasing data about public transport even as they make it more difficult to gain access to politically sensitive information like corruption and human rights abuses. In my opinion, we’d be much better off if we didn’t conflate all these things as “openness.”
Commentary: Nanjira Sambuli, Digital Equality Advocacy Manager at the Web Foundation, writes:
Over the past few years I’ve observed the open movement focusing on the power of technology. The rationale seems to be: ‘fix first the technological, and all things ‘open’ will fall into place.’
We need to acknowledge, however, that open government is about recalibrating the power dynamic between governments and citizens, putting power back in the hands of people. In that sense, it is a very political endeavour. The systems from which we are demanding openness are not ‘open by default’ for any number of reasons, and freshly signed commitments and national action plans do not automatically guarantee success in citizen empowerment.
Open Data: The Horizon2020 project, funded by the European Union, seeks to provide online platforms for data publishers to open up data and for open data users to not only access, but converse over, make sense out of and act on the information released. Through ROUTETOPA’s Transparency Enhancing Toolset (TET), public administrators can publish all public data in their possession, in bulk at first, followed by regular updates. See description here.
Budget Transparency: “Accountants With Opinions: How Can Government Audits Drive Accountability?” a blog post by Vivek Ramkumar of the International Budget Partnership. “Audit reports are withheld from the public, hearings on audit findings take place behind closed doors, and findings are not acted upon,” he writes.
Scotland: Daradjeet Jagpal describes why charities may be hesitant to make use of freedom of information, and the ways in which it can benefit them.
IFTIWatch: “We learned last week that one of the world’s leading transparency champions — Kristalina Georgieva — will join the World Bank as CEO of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Development Association. I found this hugely exciting: it represents another opportunity for the bank to regain its leadership on transparency,” writes Karin Christiansen writes in Devex.
IFTIWatch: “Anti-Transparency Steals Spotlight at COP7 Global Anti-Tobacco Conference,” alleges the international libertarian activist group Students For Liberty, as described in an article.
Open Salaries: In a 2016 Glassdoor report, only 36 percent of employees surveyed worldwide said their companies were transparent about salary — but almost twice that number, 70 percent, agreed with the statement that open discussion of pay boosts employee satisfaction and overall business success.
Filed under: What's New