First published in The Tribune on Friday, January 18, 2008 under the byline, Young Man's View.
The basis of our government’s being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right, and were it left for me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.
The words of Thomas Jefferson, the third US president, who was pitilessly assailed by the press, yet he took his criticism with dignity.
The Bahamas is an “information poor” country, where citizens are grossly kept in the dark on happenings within government. Although information/knowledge is power, many Bahamians are ill-informed, persistently ducked by their servants (politicians) and hoodwinked by certain corrupt political figures whose transgressions are veiled in secrecy.
It is impossible to have a functional democracy with a dysfunctional press, therefore the passage of a Freedom of Information (FOI) Act is pivotal to maintaining the highest standards of transparency and accountability, and eliminating much of the secrecy currently shrouding our government ministries/departments.
In 2007, the introduction of a FOI Bill was promised by the FNM government in the Speech from the Throne following their electoral victory. The government promised to strengthen and deepen our democracy by making information available to the media, disclosing all agreements with foreign investors, regularly reporting to the public on the state of the country and by upholding a code of ethics for ministers and MPs.
Freedoms of Information Acts give citizens the legal right to information held by the government, and creates a mechanism by which this information can be received. However, sometimes there are exceptions to the publishing of certain “sensitive” national security information.
The US created a FOA in 1966 that applies to all federal agencies. Agencies are required to comply with public solicitations for information, and are subject to penalties for doing otherwise.
The UK followed suit in 2000, with an Act that gives citizens the right to ask for, and be given, information held by a public authority.
A FOI Act is long overdue, as politicians and other public officials have incessantly sought to create a totalitarian society by manipulating the press, setting up sleuths to attack the media and/or trying to suppress information via propaganda tools such as ZNS. Although reporters at the Broadcasting Corporation finally seem to be breaking out of the mold, legislation must also be passed to ensure ZNS’s independence from political influence and that reporters adhere to the motto of “swearing to the dogmas of no master” (The Tribune’s motto). Sadly, because of political flattery and exploitation, several ZNS reporters/managers (both past and present) have lost all credibility that, as reporters know, can only be gained in centimeters but easily lost in kilometers.
After leaving ZNS for private radio, embattled former talk show host Darold Miller publicly expressed his excitement about being “free.”
“Yes, I have to admit,” said Mr Miller, “ZNS tied my hands a little bit after the PLP came to power, but I’m free now.”
In 2006, both PLP Chairman Raynard Rigby and Fox Hill MP Fred Mitchell had public spats with the media when they made comments that were interpreted as an attempt to muzzle a free press.
Last year, Philip Davis (PLP MP for Cat Island, Rum Cay and San Salvador) threatened the freedom of the Bahamian media when he suggested in the House of Assembly that punitive action should be taken against “biased” media outlets by withholding government advertising.
Even though it is not the place of the executive to determine who is, or is not, fair and balanced in the free press, Mr Davis went on to say that a “commission” could possibly be set up to determine the fairness of the media outlet before government advertising is done. Davis also accused “the paper” (presumably The Tribune) of fabricating a housing scandal.
In late 2006, former Housing Minister Neville Wisdom told the Nassau Guardian that The Tribune would not be allowed to visit his office to pick up copies of the names of the individuals who had been awarded a contract to build a government house under the Progressive Liberal Party’s administration. Mr Wisdom’s remarks came in response to a letter, sent by The Tribune to the Ministry, which had inquired about the development of subdivisions, specifically the names of contractors and the amount awarded to each since the PLP took office. Wisdom also contended that he could not allow any reporter to see the files held in his office, claiming that they might contain conclusions made by the Cabinet. However, although the newspaper had only asked for information about the expenditure of public funds, every conceivable ruse was employed by Wisdom and his ministry to block the disclosure of this information.
Some time ago, Melanie Roach (Director of Public Works) snootily declared in a letter to the Freeport News that she was “instituting a personal policy for the print media,” where all reporters would be required to submit their questions with their newspaper letterhead and fax or hand-deliver it to her office. She claimed that she had arrived at this conclusion because she was misquoted in The Tribune. Ms Roach’s behaviour is a prime example of why a FOI Act is necessary, as she pettily decided to write her letter because The Tribune wrote a story saying that she had “declined to comment on the issue yesterday, claiming that The Tribune has misquoted her in the past.”
Was Ms Roach advocating that information be funneled between herself and reporters? Who does Ms Roach think she is and from which cloud does she look down on the journalistic fraternity? How can Ms Roach, who serves the people, be “instituting a personal policy” on their time?
Undoubtedly, an FOI Act would advance democracy, force government officials to speak candidly and further the creation of an informed citizenry. This Act would make the release public documents, such as the housing contracts, obligatory under law. All ministers and government officials (our servants) will have to speak to inquiring, more empowered journalists.
The first draft of the landmark FOI Act has been received by AG Claire Hepburn.
Last year, Mrs Hepburn, while speaking at the Chamber of Commerce’s Meet the Minister forum, announced that she had received and was perusing the initial draft of the Act, which was to be subsequently evaluated by the Cabinet and circulated for public consultation before being presented to the House of Assembly.
Although the AG noted that she had expected the potential legislation to be presented to the House before the end of last year that did not occur. The government must hastily get on with passing this important legislation!
The government must also move to repeal the Official Secrets Act (OSA), passed under colonial rule in 1911, which makes it an offence for civil servants to divulge information gleaned during their employment, even after they may have retired or resigned. Unless repealed, an OSA co-existing alongside a FOI Act would be paradoxical as certain officials will still be tasked with seeking the go-ahead from their superiors to speak a diluted truth.
A well-informed media can avoid calamity through information. We must never apologize for attempting to report on information that the public deserves to know. The media is the watchdog that helps citizens to find ways of approaching and/or questioning the government. Freedom of information must be seen as an essential aspect in moving our country forward!
