Many thanks Kurubo/Grace,
I suppose then, in light of the foregoing, State must at all
costs avail "information" under it's possession.
Citing the "Freedom of information" clause within this context
however, makes it imperative for State to
do so within universally adopted
benchmarks. But within the same context, what is the
citizen's
responsibility?
I could check this out. But does the clause in the same vein
confer a mandatory responsibility upon the
citizen to ensure their
exercise of this "Right to access" does not go to waste, or does he/she have
the
freedom to exercise
this right/liberty liberally.
One can argue that for instance, a mother who fails
to vaccinate her child against polio, because of
"failure"
to access information as opposed
to "lack" of access to
information should be held responsible. Is this
enforceable in law..? How?
Lastly but not least, State has only a tiny custody of
information consumable by the public. I dare say that
a lot of information/knowledge sought after by information
consumers fall well outside the State domain.
How do we police those outside, who hoard information
desperately needed by consumers...? And what
of those who deliberately avail misleading
information/knowledge, including state..?
Harry
Hi Listers,
Harry, the 'Freedom of Information' clause in the constitution is designed
to give citizens free access to public information held by the state,it
generally does not impose a positive obligation on the state to impart such
information on the individual.
However,in certain instances, failure to provide the information to an
individual can be considered to constitute an interference with their private
rights and a breach of the state's human rights obligations.
Although, freedom of information legislation is reluctant to impose a
positive obligation on the state,the considered view as adopted
is that the freedom of information legislation should impose a duty on the
state to impart information to the
public.
Regards,
Kerubo
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Harry Delano
<harry@comtelsys.co.ke> wrote:
Hey Grace &
Kerubo,
Thanks
for your summary overview. I wonder aloud whether it should only be the
state that maintains this monopoly over
accessibility to
basic information in as far
as "Freedom of information" is concerned.
Whereas state has
the instruments it can use to either promote or curtail such freedoms, I
suppose it would also be safe
to say that in
quite a number of instances, state might be deemed a "lame duck".
How about a
remote Island sequestered somewhere, about 200 miles off the
shores of Lake Victoria with no basic access
to
communication?
Would the
populace there's lack thereof, of basic information access be considered an
infringement on this fundamental
right/liberty by
the state...?
Harry
Thanks Harry Delano, Washington, Cleophas and Kerubo.
Harry you raise a good question on what these terms mean
and whether they are interchangeable.
Washington, you make an
important point about freedom of expression/speech not being absolute, and
Cleophas affirms your point.
Thanks Kerubo for the
definitions. Yes, freedom of information simply means the
freedom to get certain basic information held by the state, which can enable
one to for example bring a case of human rights violation or any other cause.
Freedom of expression can mean many things, say freedom to air
your ideas, take a stand, artistic creativity--simply freedom to express
how you feel. And of course as Washington and Cleophas rightly point
out, all these freedoms are subject to limitations and therefore not
carte blanche.
In this case then:
- Is there conflict between laws on freedom of information and what
citizens demand/require?
Lets hear it from
you.
Rgds
Grace
_______________________________________________
kictanet
mailing list
kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke
http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe
or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kaykerubo%40gmail.com
The
Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people
and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The
network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of
the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
KICTANetiquette
: Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow
in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't
flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market
your wares or qualifications.