Review of RTI Act: Commission focuses on sensitisation of institutions to enhance compliance

Mr Yaw Sarpong Boateng, the Executive Secretary, Right to Information (RTI) Commission, says the focus of the Commission now is to sensitise public institutions on their roles under the RTI Act and not necessarily to punish them for non-compliance with the law.

He said although the Commission had been given prosecutorial powers to prosecute institutions and individuals that failed to comply with the law, its focus now is to educate and sensitise heads of institutions and persons mandated to release information to applicants to understand their roles under the RTI Act, to improve response to requests.

Mr Boateng said this at a public forum in Accra on Wednesday during the review of the RTI Act after three years of implementation.

Meanwhile, Compliance Surveys conducted by the Commission in 2022 showed that of the 149 public institutions monitored, 51 were found to be non-compliant, representing 34.23 per cent.

However, 98 of the institutions were compliant, representing 65.77 per cent.

For the institutions deemed non-compliant, it was discovered that limited knowledge of the Act was as a contributory factor.

The Commission received 95 applications from the public for review within the period, of which 27 of the applications went through the full process and determinations were made.

Thirty-one (31) of the reviews were settled through Alternative Dispute Resolution while 27 of the applications are at different stages of review.

Mr Boateng noted that one of its functions was to participate in the promotion of the RTI in accordance with Section 45 of the Act, 2019, (Act 989).

In accordance with this provision, the Commission undertook a series of activities aimed at sensitising persons and institutions on the RTI Act.

Some of those activities included training of management and staff, and collaborating with public institutions, civil society organisations, and the media to educate the public on the RTI.

The Commission’s independence is guaranteed by Section 42 (1)(2) of the RTI Act, which states that: “It is not subject to the direction or control of any person or authority”.

Mr Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, the Minister of Information, in his welcome remarks, said the Commissioners had worked to assert their independence and ensured their decisions were backed by law.

He said a research conducted to examine the shortfalls in the RTI implementation identified three different models for the institutional framework, namely; Institutional Framework and Enforcement of the RTI Legislation, Information Commission/or Tribunal, and the Informational Commissioner or Ombudsman.

Mr Nkrumah said the Enforcement of the RTI could be through judicial proceedings, the Information Commission or Tribunal, and the Informational Commissioner or Ombudsman.

This model directs all appeals to the judiciary when a request for information is refused based on the condition that the public organisation deems the circumstances unsatisfactory to the request.

That model was used in countries such as Nigeria, South Africa, Bulgaria, Israel, and the United States of America, which are countries known to practice the federal system of government, he said.

The Minister said when an individual is denied access to the information upon request, he could appeal to the courts directly.

“One advantage that this model of implementation holds is the certainty that the request for information has a high initial plausibility of being granted if the requester was denied inappropriately based on the powers given to these courts to investigate and their ability to pursue the appropriate punitive measures to the organisation or public official for non-compliance,” he said.

“However, this model is also fraught with some disadvantages that weigh more than the perceived advantages”.

The principal disadvantage was how costly those appeals to the courts were as well as the delay in trials and the depreciating faith that had been reposed in the judicial system by the citizens.

There was also the Information Commission or Tribunal that could order agencies to respond to a request.

With that model, Mr Nkrumah said the Information Commission or Tribunals could help with the resolution of cases in relation to denied access to information, thus reducing the workload on the courts.

There were also appeals that were made to various special appeal tribunals, known as the information commission or tribunals mandated to make rulings and orders that are binding before the court come in.

Those models are estimated to be the best and is practised in countries like India, Scotland, Mexico, and Ireland.

The popularity and efficiency of those models were based on the adherence to international standards on access to information and increasing public awareness.

The review of the RTI Act provided a platform for stakeholders to take stock of its implementation, assess the progress made and the challenges in order to ensure its efficiency and effectiveness in ensuring accountability and transparency in public resource management.

The Right to Information Commission is the body mandated to enforce the RTI Legislation.

Source: GNA