Fresh push for ATI implementation

Malawi Human Rights Commission (MHRC) has made a fresh push for the implementation of the Access to Information (ATI) law by warning public institutions that withholding or providing false information is a crime punishable by law.

The warning comes against the background that some officers entrusted with providing information in various public offices are withholding it and that MHRC is failing to fulfil its functions as an oversight institution of ATI.

In a statement issued yesterday, MHRC said it has been playing its oversight role on the ATI Act, but acknowledged failure by some information holders in public offices to provide information.

Reads the statement in part: “Furthermore, the commission would like to remind the information holders that prevention of disclosure of information, providing false information and wrongful denial of disclosure of information are a crime which are punishable by law.”

The ATI Act was operationalised by government on September 30 2020, three months after the Tonse Alliance administration was ushered into power.

In October 2020, government started recruiting information officers in public institutions in accordance with Section 12 (1)(a) which compels information holders to appoint one or more of its officers as information officers.

But according to the MHRC statement, there are some public institutions that are yet to recruit information officers.

“The commission is also aware that other institutions have not designated or appointed the information officers and it is therefore, the responsibility of those institutions to be serving as information officers,” further reads the statement.

Among others, the Act provides for the right of access to information in the custody of public bodies and private entities contracted by the government.

But despite the Act coming into force, some stakeholders, including the media, have been facing challenges in accessing information when requested from various information officers in several public institutions.

In a written response yesterday, Centre for Social Accountability and Transparency (Csat) executive director Willy Kambwandira agreed with MHRC’s observations stressing that it is the duty of public office bearers to ensure requested information is readily available not only to journalists, but interested stakeholders.

He said failure to provide requested information raises suspicions on lack of accountability and transparency adding that the ATI Act clearly provides corrective measures for violations.

Kambwandira said: “When someone is employed as an information officer their role and priority is to make available public information. But we noted of a tendency of some information officers who prioritise other issues.

“Having said that, we also noted that sometimes it is not the information officers, but directors of public institutions who are deliberately blocking access to information.”

Efforts to speak to Media Institute of Southern Africa (Misa) Malawi Chapter chairperson Teresa Ndanga proved futile as she did not respond to our calls.

In a separate interview yesterday, MHRC public relations officer Kate Kujaliwa said in the 2021/22 fiscal year, government has allocated K71 million for implementation of the ATI Act.

She said: “Under the current financial year, the allocated budget for the ATIA [Access to Information Act] Unit is K71 million. So far government has been able to provide funding as allocated.

“However, the allocation is quite low considering the amount of work planned under the unit.”

Kujaliwa said the initial roadmap to implementation of the ATI Act for 2021 needs a total of K400 million, as such, the allocated K71 million is on the lower side.

During the previous financial year, government allocated K20 million instead of the required K166 million.

Section 18 (1) of the ATI Act stipulates that a request for information from an information holder will be made orally or in writing and further Section 19 states that the requested information should be processed within 15 working days.

The Act also states that a written notice should be given to the applicant indicating whether the requested information exists or in part, and where access shall be granted to the applicant such.