Kihanya,

thanks for the background, some thoughts on some of the questions  raised,

Right to verses freedom

I think it should be freedom of information because in legal terms, the two terms are different.

Though am not a lawyer, I read about the positive rights (right to) and the negative rights (freedoms)

Now, governments are quick to obey the negative rights as opposed to positive rights. For instance, we can all go and demonstrate about our freedom from torture or detention without trial and the government will easily heed to our demands, (I guess so)

But what about other recognized rights like the right to water? Can the government be compelled to honour our right to water,

i think the main objective of the FOI should be to protect e-government and accountability but the bill talks about charging a minimal fee to those accessing information, what will happen to those people out of town, it talks about photocopying and perusal charges,

but what about provision of such information in electronic format, do we still pay?? and will it serve the overall  objective??

That’s my take on it