The Challenge of Freedom of Information in Fiji and the Pacific

In Fiji, and in fact throughout the Pacific, the need for a Freedom of Information Bill or at the very least, a comprehensive government information disclosure policy, is increasingly apparent. On the rise are human rights violations, tightly controlled public enterprises, poor delivery of basic services, lack of democratic elections, weak rule of law, poverty, unemployment and corruption. It comes as no surprise that the Pacific Islands have continued to lag behind in progressive development and governance changes occurring internationally. Access to information could help address these issues by providing the people of the Pacific with a tool to re-engage with their own governance and development.

Information challenges in the Pacific

A recurring problem in many Pacific countries is the transition from a colony to a fully independent country. It is difficult to change the ideology of respecting elders to challenging their actions; and conversely to get representatives to cater to voters beyond their immediate support base and to change from merely making promises to being accountable for their actions. Getting leaders to move from operating in secret (with the constant threat of persecution) to a culture of open dialogue in a new democracy requires time and commitment, as does the move to more open internal debate after the long habits of suppressing internal dissent.

Unfortunately, to date the need to forego centralising control and allow for checks and balances has had very limited success. The lack of public scrutiny has encouraged leaders to have ‘clients rather than constituents’. Poor governance and corruption scams have resulted in the loss and abuse of millions of dollars in state revenue and assets.

Economic restructuring and privatisation has largely failed to achieve any significant improvement in living standards or economic prospects for Pacific islanders. Therefore, the movement for good governance advocates for a fundamental policy change from an emphasis on private sector development that was expected to lead to democratisation, to a belief in participatory democracy, which encourages partnerships with the civic sector and strengthening the capacity of government. This will help to nurture a market friendly economy that will more effectively improve living standards for ordinary people.

Promoting FOI in the Pacific

The Pacific Centre for Public Integrity (PCPI) has started working towards facilitating more meaningful participatory democracy by promoting freedom of information (FOI) legislation (and Leadership Codes of Conduct) in Pacific countries. FOI supports an effective public and private sector in the economy, with respect for human rights and empowers civil society including trade unions, and NGOs and an independent media to engage more effectively with development processes. Information promotes good governance values and practices and can be used to expose and address corruption by giving the public information about what goes on inside government.

In this context, it is exciting that the movement for greater access to information in the Pacific has begun to gain momentum over recent years. Civil society in Fiji, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Papua New Guinea have already been working on promoting freedom of information domestically. A Model FOI Bill has been produced by civil society organisations in Fiji and Vanuatu, and it is understood that an FOI Bill developed by media organisations was submitted to the Cabinet in the Cook Islands. FOI is being promoted through targeted civil society awareness campaigns, most commonly through awareness-raising and training workshops, development and dissemination of information through the media and preparation of information advocacy packs to assist the civic sector to effectively lobby their governments on FOI.

FOI opportunities in Fiji

In Fiji, the right to information is a constitutional right, where apart from the right to freedom of expression, section 174 of the Constitution provides that: As soon as practicable after the commencement of this Constitution, the Parliament should enact a law to give members of the public rights of access to official documents of the Government and its agencies. It is important to note that Fiji does not have parliamentary sovereignty but constitutional sovereignty which means that as the supreme governing law of Fiji, the provision on the right to information is absolute.

It is now 2006, nearly a decade since the Constitution was enacted. While PCPI has been assured that a draft FOI Bill is in the pipeline, to date there has still been nothing that has been released for public, or even parliamentary, debate. In 2001, an exposure draft of an FOI Bill was released by a different Fijian Government, but this Bill has lapsed and nothing has been released to replace it. This is disappointing, considering the need for FOI in Fiji.

In August 2005, PCPI organised a workshop on sensitising the media on public information disclosure – both by explaining the principles of good legislation, as well as by discussing its value in enhancing media freedom and effectiveness. PCPI, along with the Regional Rights and Resource Team and Transparency International Fiji, also participated in another workshop on FOI run by the Secretariat to the Fiji Parliament. The workshop was an important opportunity to talk to the many new MPs elected in the recent Fiji elections – as well as returned MPs – about the importance of FOI for their constituents and for Fiji itself. In light of the fact that an FOI Bill has been touted already by the new Government, it was also a chance to teach MPs about the principles of best practice FOI legislation, so that when a Bill is finally tabled they can more effectively scrutinise it to ensure that the Fijian people get an FOI Bill that reflects international best practice.

The workshop drew out some very interesting FOI issues, which are relevant not only to the Fiji context, but also to the Pacific more broadly. As the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative resource person who attended the workshop highlighted, the right to information offers a cheap but effective way of meaningfully promoting public participation in governance, as well as achieving more effective accountability of public figures and public institutions. In that context, it is particularly important that any FOI law covers all institutions which spend public funds including trusts, the private sector and civic society bodies to the extent that they receive public funds. In the local context, this means that people will need to decide whether bodies such as the Great Council of Chiefs are covered by the law. How is the cultural respect of tribal elders to be balanced against the taxpayers’ right to know how public funds are spent?

In developing countries in particular, it is important that the state should regularly disclose information to the general public, for example by publishing documents on the internet and putting important information on local noticeboards or departmental offices. Many people in the Pacific simply will not have the time or resources to make individual requests for basic information, so instead the government could disclose information via putting notices in local newspapers or airing announcements over the radio.

At a more technical level, the workshop also drew out issues about how exactly an FOI regime would operate in the Pacific. How would applications be submitted, especially by illiterate people and/or people who live in far off rural areas? The CHRI speaker noted that other similar jurisdictions provided good examples of cheap, fast modes of accessing information.

One of the most important and interesting issues that will need to be dealt with is who will be responsible for handling any complaints about the law. If bureaucrats reject information requests, who will be responsible for considering complaints because a member of the public feels their application was unfairly rejected? In Fiji, this could be the existing Ombudsman or the Human Rights Commission, both of which options would keep down costs. Whatever body is chosen, it is important that they are staunchly independent of government influence and interference, and have strong investigation and decision-making powers.

Overall, both the FOI workshops recently held in Fiji were a huge success. The overwhelming support for the implementation of FOI (and a Leadership Code) by the Parliamentarians themselves was a positive and encouraging step towards the recognition of good governance in an economy like Fiji. In the comming months, PCPI now aims to inform, educate and train the leaders, the public and all the stakeholders involved on FOI issues in Fiji and also plans to undertake similar activities in other countries of the Pacific.