Rick Snell
The Sydney Morning Herald (Australia)
CAMBODIA is the latest entrant to the list of countries considering a freedom of information law. It is a country riddled by corruption, where the average wage per day is less than $1.25, and where the people struggle to care for 500,000 orphans in the aftermath of two decades of civil war.
In the midst of this, FoI, instead of being considered an unnecessary luxury, has been accepted by the Cambodians as an important step in improving economic development and governance, and as a tool in the difficult fight to reduce widespread corruption.
An interministerial team has just added the final touches to a draft policy on FoI that will be presented in the next few weeks to the country's council of ministers.
The drafting team attempted to adapt best practice to fit the circumstances of Cambodia. This is no easy task in a place where corruption lies behind most transactions. Most public servants earn less than $50 a month and spend most of their work days at a second job or using their government position to extract money via "extra fees" and under-the-table payments to eke out a living for their extended family.
I worked with the drafting team, which included two generals and several secretaries of state, for two months in Phnom Penh. In meetings and consultations with the ministers of information and national defence and leading public servants I was struck by the contrast between their willingness to accept FoI and the Australian Government's dismal record.
The upper echelons of the Cambodian Government were willing to consider endorsing very progressive FoI laws despite the obvious discomfort that greater transparency and accountability will bring to their monopoly on power and patronage.
Meanwhile, their Australian equivalents have allowed our FoI laws to fall into disrepair and the ALP's support for more effective laws is at best low-key or pitched at a subliminal level.
More effort, time and money has been invested by successive Australian governments in denying access to information than has been committed to improving timely access to high-quality and reliable government data. My time in Cambodia has convinced me that we need to undertake a quantum shift and rebuild our FoI laws from the ground up.
If there is a change of government later this year, then on day one it must take three actions. First, public servants should be instructed that there will be no more game-playing and non-compliance with one of the most important laws of our country.
Second, as a quick and temporary fix, the Government should immediately pass the majority of amendments suggested by the Australian Law Reform Commission in 1996.
Third, a taskforce should be established to redesign the way we manage, protect and allow access to government-held information.
The National Integrity System Assessment Project in late 2005 recommended that we should stop tinkering with a faulty mechanism and think creatively about achieving a functional public "right-to-know" law.
Some small and simple changes can transform the way FoI works.
The project suggested that there be a reverse onus of proof. If a person is forced to make an application for information then the agency, if it wants to refuse the application, must appeal to an Information Commissioner to justify its decision, otherwise the information must be released.
This is an immediate circuit-breaker to the current problem of agency delay, vague justifications and the necessity for applicants to initiate, and often bear the costs of, tribunal or court actions.
FoI policy is not a vote-winner.
Good FoI policy is something that aspiring statesmen tie their colours to because it makes a difference.
Rick Snell lectures in law at the University of Tasmania, where he specialises in FoI. He worked in Cambodia on behalf of USAID.
In the midst of this, FoI, instead of being considered an unnecessary luxury, has been accepted by the Cambodians as an important step in improving economic development and governance, and as a tool in the difficult fight to reduce widespread corruption.
An interministerial team has just added the final touches to a draft policy on FoI that will be presented in the next few weeks to the country's council of ministers.
The drafting team attempted to adapt best practice to fit the circumstances of Cambodia. This is no easy task in a place where corruption lies behind most transactions. Most public servants earn less than $50 a month and spend most of their work days at a second job or using their government position to extract money via "extra fees" and under-the-table payments to eke out a living for their extended family.
I worked with the drafting team, which included two generals and several secretaries of state, for two months in Phnom Penh. In meetings and consultations with the ministers of information and national defence and leading public servants I was struck by the contrast between their willingness to accept FoI and the Australian Government's dismal record.
The upper echelons of the Cambodian Government were willing to consider endorsing very progressive FoI laws despite the obvious discomfort that greater transparency and accountability will bring to their monopoly on power and patronage.
Meanwhile, their Australian equivalents have allowed our FoI laws to fall into disrepair and the ALP's support for more effective laws is at best low-key or pitched at a subliminal level.
More effort, time and money has been invested by successive Australian governments in denying access to information than has been committed to improving timely access to high-quality and reliable government data. My time in Cambodia has convinced me that we need to undertake a quantum shift and rebuild our FoI laws from the ground up.
If there is a change of government later this year, then on day one it must take three actions. First, public servants should be instructed that there will be no more game-playing and non-compliance with one of the most important laws of our country.
Second, as a quick and temporary fix, the Government should immediately pass the majority of amendments suggested by the Australian Law Reform Commission in 1996.
Third, a taskforce should be established to redesign the way we manage, protect and allow access to government-held information.
The National Integrity System Assessment Project in late 2005 recommended that we should stop tinkering with a faulty mechanism and think creatively about achieving a functional public "right-to-know" law.
Some small and simple changes can transform the way FoI works.
The project suggested that there be a reverse onus of proof. If a person is forced to make an application for information then the agency, if it wants to refuse the application, must appeal to an Information Commissioner to justify its decision, otherwise the information must be released.
This is an immediate circuit-breaker to the current problem of agency delay, vague justifications and the necessity for applicants to initiate, and often bear the costs of, tribunal or court actions.
FoI policy is not a vote-winner.
Good FoI policy is something that aspiring statesmen tie their colours to because it makes a difference.
Rick Snell lectures in law at the University of Tasmania, where he specialises in FoI. He worked in Cambodia on behalf of USAID.
No comments:
Post a Comment