THE LAGOS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY
OBSERVATIONS ,COMMENTS AND CORRECTIONS ON THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2004
GENERAL OBSERVATION & COMMENTS
Overall it is a very good bill that would promote transparency, accountability and good governance. Because the Bill as it is would compel the release of information, it would among other things control recklessness in the performance of government contracts through proper monitoring. The Bill would also have a whistle blowing effect on corruption because those in the Executive, Legislature and the Judiciary would see it as a self-warning system. This is also applicable to all institutions in the Private and Public Sectors. The Bill would definitely permeate all sectors of the economy and improve information management.
However, the bill ought to be very clear in its operations to reduce blackmailing, witch-hunting and reckless invocation of right to information. It is our submission that it should be used for corrective rather than destructive purposes, as the access to information should not give people the licence to blackmail others. This is because if care is not taken, oppositions, civil rights groups and the Press can orchestrate the perceived weaknesses of government thereby distracting from governance and bringing the government to its knees. In order to forestall these malicious tendencies there should be adequate punishment for the misuse of the Act.
In conclusion, we see the Bill as a good one for the country but is should strike a balance between the good it offers and the danger it portends.
CORRECTIONS
Page 3 Section 3 Not all private companies are performing public functions therefore the scope of coverage should be expanded. “ Public Functions” be changed to “ any company carrying out businesses in Nigeria”
Page 3 Section 4 “ Writing” should be defined as “ writing or electronic mail”
Page 3 Section 5 Issue of access to records is not properly covered. There is room for officers concerned to technically delay the release of information. Therefore in all the document, “ Head” should further be defined as “ whoever is acting in that capacity”.
Page 4 Section 6 (1) Institutions should provide information up to the limits of what is available to them before referral to the other institution
Page 4 Section 8 This should be subject to corrections made in Page 3 Section 3
Page 6 Section 11 (1c) Last line: “worlds” should read “words”
Page 6 Section 12 (b) “ is distinct form” should read “ in distinct form”
Page 7 Section 13 There should be room for declassifying of documents after a specified number of years as it is done in the United States of America.
Page 9 Section 18 (i) Last Line: “extents” should read “extends”