Kenya is yet to attain a 100 per cent
score in her pursuit of easing access to information to the public.
According to a Report by the Commission on Administrative Justice (CAJ), despite the country’s stringent strides to comply with Access to Information Act (ATI) 2016, country still grapples with challenges such as inadequate resources, culture of secrecy, inadequate capacity, as well as lack of a national policy to guide records management.
In its Report, Milestones
and Challenges in Implementation of the Access to Information Act, 2016, the
commission now recommends more focus on improving access to information
infrastructure, streamlining mechanisms for disclosure of information, and
strengthening records management and computerisation.
The research which involved data from a sample of 139
institutions and 407 members of the public in 21 counties seeking services at
various institutions, also found out that private institutions were more
efficient in processing general requests for information compared to government
facilities owing to long bureaucratic processes.
“The findings reveal that over 60 per cent of the
institutions have established access to information management infrastructure.
However, the county governments and private bodies had inadequate access to
information management infrastructure,” the report shows.
The study shows that over 65 per cent of the institutions have
put in place mechanisms to enhance efficiency in reactive disclosure of
information.
The mechanisms include:
institutionalisation of access to information, development of institutional
frameworks, widening of channels for requesting information, awareness creation
on internal procedures for requesting information and adoption of technology.
The study established that an ingrained culture of secrecy and a
negative staff attitude towards disclosure of information impeded access to
information in some institutions.
Others that hindered access to information are poor organisational
culture which included unresponsiveness, discourtesy, delay, rudeness and
impunity.
Additionally, members of the public reported that some officers
solicited bribes to grant information. This led to apathy amongst the members
of the public from seeking information.
In regard to record digitisation, 67.0 per cent of the institutions
sampled had digitised their operational records leaving out digitisation of
records on core services.
This, according to the CAJ Report, showed non-compliance with
the ATI act of computerising records.
In terms of the level of public awareness on their
constitutional right of access to information, the study found that 68.8 per
cent of the interviewed respondents were aware.
On record management, it was found that 87 per cent of the
institutions have designated records management offices and 87 per cent of the
institutions have established both physical and electronic record management
systems.
“Pertaining records management as required by the Act, most of
the institutions had not complied with digitisation and computerisation but
rather had automated their operational processes such as
payroll and procurement. There were noticeable milestones attributed to the
implementation of the Access to Information Act, 2016 by the institutions. This
centered on institutionalization, strengthening information disclosure
procedure and processes, enhanced information disclosure benefits and awareness
on the Right of Access to Information public,” the Report reads.
It was similarly found out that a higher proportion of men (at
71.0 per cent) were aware of their constitutional right to access to
information as compared to women at 66.0 per cent.
In terms of age, persons aged between 26-33 years (73.0
per cent) had the highest awareness while those aged above 60 years (57 per
cent) ranked lowest.
Education level also played a big role on the matter with
persons with university education (79 per cent) being aware of their right to
access to education compared to other levels of learning.
In concluding its report, the
Ombudsman recommends both the county government and private bodies to
develop access to Information management infrastructure, including ATI
manuals and regulations.
In addition, CAJ has called for
collaboration between public and private entities in terms of facilitating how
special interests groups such as persons with disabilities, could access
information with ease.
The report also recommends that the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner and CAJ upscale public education in regard to their respective mandate with an aim of addressing perceived conflict between ATI Act 2016 and Data Protection Acts, 2019.
