Information retrieval in transitional societies: Risky business
Access to information is taken for granted in any full-fledged democracy, but is still wanting in many transitional societies. The situation seems nevertheless to have improved in the past decade – at least on the formal level. A number of countries throughout the world, including states in Sub-Saharan Africa, have embraced access to information (ATI) legislation. Many of these countries, nonetheless, struggle with the implementation of the legislation. Access to information turns out to be a troubling business for many journalists in less democratic societies, despite promises of better attitudes in the public administration.
This paper investigates experiences with access to information for journalists in four countries in East Africa and the Horn of Africa: Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda. All four countries have passed ATI laws in the past decade. The aim of the study is to describe experiences that journalists in the four countries have with information retrieval. In-depth interviews were conducted with experienced reporters and editors from various media houses, mostly in the capital cities of the four countries.
Although practices with information retrieval are somewhat different, the study finds common experiences among the journalists. Firstly, although it is clear that media professionals are aware of the new legislation, ATI requests have not become part of the daily news routine. Secondly, the journalists perceive the exemptions allowed by the ATI regulation to be so broad that officials easily can find a reason to reject an information request if they so wish. The time limit for giving the information is also seen as a hindrance. Few of the researched media houses have a practice of lodging formal complaints when an information request is rejected, even though the legislation allows such complaints. Thirdly, on the positive side, the ATI legislation creates a sense of equity between journalists, insofar as all journalists have an equal right to request information, contrasting previous times when sharing of information often was restricted to named reporters according to reputation and kinship with higher officials.
Most interestingly yet, the study points to a paradox in information retrieval practices in the researched countries: While ATI legislation, often inspired by regulation in European countries, treats information as essentially written, much information-sharing taking place between public offices and the media in East Africa and the Horn of Africa is not about exchange of documents and records, but more about negotiated oral communication. In reality, the request for information often leads to confrontation between journalists and public officials, and demand for specific documents is typically regarded as sheer provocation.
This paper investigates experiences with access to information for journalists in four countries in East Africa and the Horn of Africa: Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda. All four countries have passed ATI laws in the past decade. The aim of the study is to describe experiences that journalists in the four countries have with information retrieval. In-depth interviews were conducted with experienced reporters and editors from various media houses, mostly in the capital cities of the four countries.
Although practices with information retrieval are somewhat different, the study finds common experiences among the journalists. Firstly, although it is clear that media professionals are aware of the new legislation, ATI requests have not become part of the daily news routine. Secondly, the journalists perceive the exemptions allowed by the ATI regulation to be so broad that officials easily can find a reason to reject an information request if they so wish. The time limit for giving the information is also seen as a hindrance. Few of the researched media houses have a practice of lodging formal complaints when an information request is rejected, even though the legislation allows such complaints. Thirdly, on the positive side, the ATI legislation creates a sense of equity between journalists, insofar as all journalists have an equal right to request information, contrasting previous times when sharing of information often was restricted to named reporters according to reputation and kinship with higher officials.
Most interestingly yet, the study points to a paradox in information retrieval practices in the researched countries: While ATI legislation, often inspired by regulation in European countries, treats information as essentially written, much information-sharing taking place between public offices and the media in East Africa and the Horn of Africa is not about exchange of documents and records, but more about negotiated oral communication. In reality, the request for information often leads to confrontation between journalists and public officials, and demand for specific documents is typically regarded as sheer provocation.
Publisert i Paper presented at the World Press Freedom Day 2019, UNESCO pre-conference on safety for journalists. , 2019
Les artikkelen her