Information Act Section 13 (3) was never utilized

Dear Editor,

The Guyana chapter of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) — the global effort to promote transparency and accountability in the extractive sector — was recently complaining (again) about the reluctance of several government agencies to divulge information for public consumption. This reluctance is only one instance of a larger national mental infirmity. In Guyana, our right to public information is disrespected as much as it is neglected.

In 2011, probably to comply with some externally-imposed conditionality, we enacted the Access to Information Act. Under the act, a Commissioner of Information was appointed. Apparently, it was assumed that was all that was needed: appoint a retired judge to twiddle his thumbs while waiting for complaints from the public.

The heart of the Access to Information lies in its Section 13 (3), which states: “It shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take steps in accordance with this Act to provide as much information of its own volition to the public at regular intervals through various means of communication so that the public have minimum necessity to have recourse to the provisions of this Act to obtain information.”

It should be the ‘constant endeavour’ of the Commissioner of Information to ensure public authorities meet that obligation. No such endeavour has ever been undertaken here. Appointing retired judges for such important public offices merely because they are retired judges is a practice that needs to be reviewed. Let’s appoint persons who understand the mission at hand.

Sincerely,

Sherwood Lowe