Contractually obligated secrecy ensuring ‘total blackout of silence’

An even more worrying development, the Ombudsman explained, was the attempt to “ensure a total blackout of silence” by binding parties contracting with the government not to disclose any information without any prior approval from the relevant authority,

not because of any commercial interests, but because of specific clauses precluding them from doing so.

“Outright refusal or extreme reluctance to disclose information can be said to have become a style of government that is seriously denting the openness and transparency of the public administration.”

The situation, he said, has been further compounded by the fact that many public authorities claim to have the right to withhold information because they are administered on commercial lines, highlighting that the issue has begun to infect the country’s essential services, such as health and energy, which are now being provided for by private companies.

“The companies have long held that they are only accountable for their performance of their contractual obligations, and are therefore not bound to provide any information to third parties.”

“The situation is fast getting out of control and the people’s right to an accountable public administration is being seriously prejudiced. Action needs to be taken to remedy a rapidly deteriorating situation. There is an urgent need for an informed debate that could lead to consensus on the measures needed to ensure openness and transparency in the management of public affairs.”

While recognising that public administration needs to hold some discretion, especially when in ongoing negotiations, and stating that these issues have not seriously hindered the work of the Office, he did, however, highlight some notable cases: