Freedom of Information Bill and Open Standards
Apologies for cross-posting. The Peruvian Government in 2005 passed a law mandating the use of Free/Libre software in all Government agencies (bodies funded by the tax payer). I have reproduced some excerpts here below that tie in with our Freedom of Information Bill (and to a large extent the Data Protection Bill). Please note that the use of the term free is not to be confused to mean free of cost, but more about liberty, openness, open standards and access to source code. *"The guarantee of these rights in our Constitution is not solely based on the good will of the State's agents to fulfill the norms of the Constitution, but also based on the use of technologies that in some cases contribute, and in others do not, to an effective protection of said citizens' rights.* *It is in this context of utmost importance for the State to implement those technologies that help reinforce the exercise of the right of citizens' to access information and to withhold it in cases that require so. * *The use of Free Software in all of the State's agencies points in this direction. Basically, we can say that the fundamental principles that drive the present Bill are tightly related to the basic guarantees of a democratic State and we can sum them up in the following:* - *Free Access of the citizens to public information* - *Pereniality of public data* - *Security of the State and of the citizens* *To guarantee the citizens' free access to information, it is indispensable that the coding of the data not be tied to a sole provider. The use of standard and open formats guarantees this free access, making possible the creation of compatible software.* *To guarantee the pereniality of public data, it is indispensable that the use and maintenance of software does not depend on the good will of the providers, nor of monopolic conditions, imposed by them. Systems can be guaranteed by the availability of the source code.* *To guarantee national security it is vital to have systems that are devoid of elements that allow remote control or the transmission of non-desired information to third-parties. Therefore, it is required to have systems whose source code is freely accessible to the public, so that its inspection be allowed by the State, the citizens and a great number of freelance experts in the world."* Please see the following links for more info: Peru's Bill - Use of free software in Government agencies<http://opensource.org/docs/bill-EngTrans.php> Peruvian Congressman refutes Microsoft's "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt" (F.U.D.) concerning free and open source software.<http://opensource.org/docs/peru_and_ms.php> Now, looking at our Freedom of Information Bill, the right to access of information by citizens is also anchored in the constitution under Article 35 of the Constitution. But the FOI does not make any reference to the method of processing or storage of that data and information by tghe public bodies. Part VII, Section 49, says "Every public authority or private body shall operate and maintain digital records"* There are two weaknesses with this particular section: * 1. Is the Government mandated to require Private (bodies) companies to maintain digital records?* *Is this what the Bill aims to achieve? Or is it targeted at particular private bodies that deal with public data, say Banks or Hospitals? How does one differentiate? Maybe it needs to be a bit more specific 2. he requirement to maintain digital records also needs to go further and demand that such records must be maintained in an open and standard format, without tying the public to specific proprietary formats. As indicated in the above excerpt from the Peruvian Act, it is pretty obvious that the technology used has a large bearing to the access of information to citizens. There are certain instances where even web based applications in certain public bodies could only work on certain browsers. This denies all the right to access such public information. At the same time, storing public data in proprietary formats means that the availability of such data in the long term depends on the survival and availability of the particular vendor (pereniality of public data). This also extends to the processing systems. Fast forward to 2013, would the IEBC be able to give access to the source code of the softwares that it will use in its operations for public audit and scrutiny? What if someone has a problem with the electronic voter registration or voting and feels that they need to have access to that code so as to ensure transparency? And what about all other public bodies? In the mean time, if I was to ask for information from a public body, what formats will I get the information in? Will those formats still be supported 20 years from now? Will the vendor require that we upgrade our systems (of course at additional costs) for us to continue getting access? To answer these questions, the FOI needs to be very specific and demand that all public bodies process and store data in open and standard formats that are not vendor specific, nor proprietary. As tax payers and the people paying for these entities, we have a right to demand this. -- *---------------------------------------------------- Kind Regards, Evans Ikua,* lanetconsulting.com, lpi-eastafrica.org, ict-innovation.fossfa.net, Skype: @ikuae Cell: +254-722-955831
I don't think we have the luxury of this train of thought given that an embarrassingly large number of government bodies are either unable or have refused to automate their operations. This particular cart is before the horse. On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Evans Ikua <ikua.evans@gmail.com> wrote:
Apologies for cross-posting.
The Peruvian Government in 2005 passed a law mandating the use of Free/Libre software in all Government agencies (bodies funded by the tax payer). I have reproduced some excerpts here below that tie in with our Freedom of Information Bill (and to a large extent the Data Protection Bill). Please note that the use of the term free is not to be confused to mean free of cost, but more about liberty, openness, open standards and access to source code.
*"The guarantee of these rights in our Constitution is not solely based on the good will of the State's agents to fulfill the norms of the Constitution, but also based on the use of technologies that in some cases contribute, and in others do not, to an effective protection of said citizens' rights.*
*It is in this context of utmost importance for the State to implement those technologies that help reinforce the exercise of the right of citizens' to access information and to withhold it in cases that require so. *
*The use of Free Software in all of the State's agencies points in this direction. Basically, we can say that the fundamental principles that drive the present Bill are tightly related to the basic guarantees of a democratic State and we can sum them up in the following:*
- *Free Access of the citizens to public information* - *Pereniality of public data* - *Security of the State and of the citizens*
*To guarantee the citizens' free access to information, it is indispensable that the coding of the data not be tied to a sole provider. The use of standard and open formats guarantees this free access, making possible the creation of compatible software.*
*To guarantee the pereniality of public data, it is indispensable that the use and maintenance of software does not depend on the good will of the providers, nor of monopolic conditions, imposed by them. Systems can be guaranteed by the availability of the source code.*
*To guarantee national security it is vital to have systems that are devoid of elements that allow remote control or the transmission of non-desired information to third-parties. Therefore, it is required to have systems whose source code is freely accessible to the public, so that its inspection be allowed by the State, the citizens and a great number of freelance experts in the world."* Please see the following links for more info: Peru's Bill - Use of free software in Government agencies<http://opensource.org/docs/bill-EngTrans.php>
Peruvian Congressman refutes Microsoft's "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt" (F.U.D.) concerning free and open source software.<http://opensource.org/docs/peru_and_ms.php>
Now, looking at our Freedom of Information Bill, the right to access of information by citizens is also anchored in the constitution under Article 35 of the Constitution. But the FOI does not make any reference to the method of processing or storage of that data and information by tghe public bodies. Part VII, Section 49, says "Every public authority or private body shall operate and maintain digital records"*
There are two weaknesses with this particular section: *
1. Is the Government mandated to require Private (bodies) companies to maintain digital records?* *Is this what the Bill aims to achieve? Or is it targeted at particular private bodies that deal with public data, say Banks or Hospitals? How does one differentiate? Maybe it needs to be a bit more specific 2. he requirement to maintain digital records also needs to go further and demand that such records must be maintained in an open and standard format, without tying the public to specific proprietary formats. As indicated in the above excerpt from the Peruvian Act, it is pretty obvious that the technology used has a large bearing to the access of information to citizens. There are certain instances where even web based applications in certain public bodies could only work on certain browsers. This denies all the right to access such public information. At the same time, storing public data in proprietary formats means that the availability of such data in the long term depends on the survival and availability of the particular vendor (pereniality of public data). This also extends to the processing systems.
Fast forward to 2013, would the IEBC be able to give access to the source code of the softwares that it will use in its operations for public audit and scrutiny? What if someone has a problem with the electronic voter registration or voting and feels that they need to have access to that code so as to ensure transparency? And what about all other public bodies?
In the mean time, if I was to ask for information from a public body, what formats will I get the information in? Will those formats still be supported 20 years from now? Will the vendor require that we upgrade our systems (of course at additional costs) for us to continue getting access?
To answer these questions, the FOI needs to be very specific and demand that all public bodies process and store data in open and standard formats that are not vendor specific, nor proprietary. As tax payers and the people paying for these entities, we have a right to demand this.
-- *---------------------------------------------------- Kind Regards, Evans Ikua,* lanetconsulting.com, lpi-eastafrica.org, ict-innovation.fossfa.net, Skype: @ikuae Cell: +254-722-955831
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/conradakunga%40gmail.c...
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.
I am not sure I understand your argument Conrad. Please clarify what you mean. Evans On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Rad! <conradakunga@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't think we have the luxury of this train of thought given that an embarrassingly large number of government bodies are either unable or have refused to automate their operations. This particular cart is before the horse.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Evans Ikua <ikua.evans@gmail.com> wrote:
Apologies for cross-posting.
The Peruvian Government in 2005 passed a law mandating the use of Free/Libre software in all Government agencies (bodies funded by the tax payer). I have reproduced some excerpts here below that tie in with our Freedom of Information Bill (and to a large extent the Data Protection Bill). Please note that the use of the term free is not to be confused to mean free of cost, but more about liberty, openness, open standards and access to source code.
*"The guarantee of these rights in our Constitution is not solely based on the good will of the State's agents to fulfill the norms of the Constitution, but also based on the use of technologies that in some cases contribute, and in others do not, to an effective protection of said citizens' rights.*
*It is in this context of utmost importance for the State to implement those technologies that help reinforce the exercise of the right of citizens' to access information and to withhold it in cases that require so. *
*The use of Free Software in all of the State's agencies points in this direction. Basically, we can say that the fundamental principles that drive the present Bill are tightly related to the basic guarantees of a democratic State and we can sum them up in the following:*
- *Free Access of the citizens to public information* - *Pereniality of public data* - *Security of the State and of the citizens*
*To guarantee the citizens' free access to information, it is indispensable that the coding of the data not be tied to a sole provider. The use of standard and open formats guarantees this free access, making possible the creation of compatible software.*
*To guarantee the pereniality of public data, it is indispensable that the use and maintenance of software does not depend on the good will of the providers, nor of monopolic conditions, imposed by them. Systems can be guaranteed by the availability of the source code.*
*To guarantee national security it is vital to have systems that are devoid of elements that allow remote control or the transmission of non-desired information to third-parties. Therefore, it is required to have systems whose source code is freely accessible to the public, so that its inspection be allowed by the State, the citizens and a great number of freelance experts in the world."* Please see the following links for more info: Peru's Bill - Use of free software in Government agencies<http://opensource.org/docs/bill-EngTrans.php>
Peruvian Congressman refutes Microsoft's "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt" (F.U.D.) concerning free and open source software.<http://opensource.org/docs/peru_and_ms.php>
Now, looking at our Freedom of Information Bill, the right to access of information by citizens is also anchored in the constitution under Article 35 of the Constitution. But the FOI does not make any reference to the method of processing or storage of that data and information by tghe public bodies. Part VII, Section 49, says "Every public authority or private body shall operate and maintain digital records"*
There are two weaknesses with this particular section: *
1. Is the Government mandated to require Private (bodies) companies to maintain digital records?* *Is this what the Bill aims to achieve? Or is it targeted at particular private bodies that deal with public data, say Banks or Hospitals? How does one differentiate? Maybe it needs to be a bit more specific 2. he requirement to maintain digital records also needs to go further and demand that such records must be maintained in an open and standard format, without tying the public to specific proprietary formats. As indicated in the above excerpt from the Peruvian Act, it is pretty obvious that the technology used has a large bearing to the access of information to citizens. There are certain instances where even web based applications in certain public bodies could only work on certain browsers. This denies all the right to access such public information. At the same time, storing public data in proprietary formats means that the availability of such data in the long term depends on the survival and availability of the particular vendor (pereniality of public data). This also extends to the processing systems.
Fast forward to 2013, would the IEBC be able to give access to the source code of the softwares that it will use in its operations for public audit and scrutiny? What if someone has a problem with the electronic voter registration or voting and feels that they need to have access to that code so as to ensure transparency? And what about all other public bodies?
In the mean time, if I was to ask for information from a public body, what formats will I get the information in? Will those formats still be supported 20 years from now? Will the vendor require that we upgrade our systems (of course at additional costs) for us to continue getting access?
To answer these questions, the FOI needs to be very specific and demand that all public bodies process and store data in open and standard formats that are not vendor specific, nor proprietary. As tax payers and the people paying for these entities, we have a right to demand this.
-- *---------------------------------------------------- Kind Regards, Evans Ikua,* lanetconsulting.com, lpi-eastafrica.org, ict-innovation.fossfa.net, Skype: @ikuae Cell: +254-722-955831
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/conradakunga%40gmail.c...
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.
-- *---------------------------------------------------- Kind Regards, Evans Ikua,* lanetconsulting.com, lpi-eastafrica.org, ict-innovation.fossfa.net, Skype: @ikuae Cell: +254-722-955831
Many government bodies do not have data in electronic form at all, open or otherwise; ego requesting data in an open format is moot On 26 Jul 2012 12:23, "Evans Ikua" <ikua.evans@gmail.com> wrote:
I am not sure I understand your argument Conrad. Please clarify what you mean.
Evans
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Rad! <conradakunga@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't think we have the luxury of this train of thought given that an embarrassingly large number of government bodies are either unable or have refused to automate their operations. This particular cart is before the horse.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Evans Ikua <ikua.evans@gmail.com>wrote:
Apologies for cross-posting.
The Peruvian Government in 2005 passed a law mandating the use of Free/Libre software in all Government agencies (bodies funded by the tax payer). I have reproduced some excerpts here below that tie in with our Freedom of Information Bill (and to a large extent the Data Protection Bill). Please note that the use of the term free is not to be confused to mean free of cost, but more about liberty, openness, open standards and access to source code.
*"The guarantee of these rights in our Constitution is not solely based on the good will of the State's agents to fulfill the norms of the Constitution, but also based on the use of technologies that in some cases contribute, and in others do not, to an effective protection of said citizens' rights.*
*It is in this context of utmost importance for the State to implement those technologies that help reinforce the exercise of the right of citizens' to access information and to withhold it in cases that require so. *
*The use of Free Software in all of the State's agencies points in this direction. Basically, we can say that the fundamental principles that drive the present Bill are tightly related to the basic guarantees of a democratic State and we can sum them up in the following:*
- *Free Access of the citizens to public information* - *Pereniality of public data* - *Security of the State and of the citizens*
*To guarantee the citizens' free access to information, it is indispensable that the coding of the data not be tied to a sole provider. The use of standard and open formats guarantees this free access, making possible the creation of compatible software.*
*To guarantee the pereniality of public data, it is indispensable that the use and maintenance of software does not depend on the good will of the providers, nor of monopolic conditions, imposed by them. Systems can be guaranteed by the availability of the source code.*
*To guarantee national security it is vital to have systems that are devoid of elements that allow remote control or the transmission of non-desired information to third-parties. Therefore, it is required to have systems whose source code is freely accessible to the public, so that its inspection be allowed by the State, the citizens and a great number of freelance experts in the world."* Please see the following links for more info: Peru's Bill - Use of free software in Government agencies<http://opensource.org/docs/bill-EngTrans.php>
Peruvian Congressman refutes Microsoft's "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt" (F.U.D.) concerning free and open source software.<http://opensource.org/docs/peru_and_ms.php>
Now, looking at our Freedom of Information Bill, the right to access of information by citizens is also anchored in the constitution under Article 35 of the Constitution. But the FOI does not make any reference to the method of processing or storage of that data and information by tghe public bodies. Part VII, Section 49, says "Every public authority or private body shall operate and maintain digital records"*
There are two weaknesses with this particular section: *
1. Is the Government mandated to require Private (bodies) companies to maintain digital records?* *Is this what the Bill aims to achieve? Or is it targeted at particular private bodies that deal with public data, say Banks or Hospitals? How does one differentiate? Maybe it needs to be a bit more specific 2. he requirement to maintain digital records also needs to go further and demand that such records must be maintained in an open and standard format, without tying the public to specific proprietary formats. As indicated in the above excerpt from the Peruvian Act, it is pretty obvious that the technology used has a large bearing to the access of information to citizens. There are certain instances where even web based applications in certain public bodies could only work on certain browsers. This denies all the right to access such public information. At the same time, storing public data in proprietary formats means that the availability of such data in the long term depends on the survival and availability of the particular vendor (pereniality of public data). This also extends to the processing systems.
Fast forward to 2013, would the IEBC be able to give access to the source code of the softwares that it will use in its operations for public audit and scrutiny? What if someone has a problem with the electronic voter registration or voting and feels that they need to have access to that code so as to ensure transparency? And what about all other public bodies?
In the mean time, if I was to ask for information from a public body, what formats will I get the information in? Will those formats still be supported 20 years from now? Will the vendor require that we upgrade our systems (of course at additional costs) for us to continue getting access?
To answer these questions, the FOI needs to be very specific and demand that all public bodies process and store data in open and standard formats that are not vendor specific, nor proprietary. As tax payers and the people paying for these entities, we have a right to demand this.
-- *---------------------------------------------------- Kind Regards, Evans Ikua,* lanetconsulting.com, lpi-eastafrica.org, ict-innovation.fossfa.net, Skype: @ikuae Cell: +254-722-955831
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/conradakunga%40gmail.c...
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.
-- *---------------------------------------------------- Kind Regards, Evans Ikua,* lanetconsulting.com, lpi-eastafrica.org, ict-innovation.fossfa.net, Skype: @ikuae Cell: +254-722-955831
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/conradakunga%40gmail.c...
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.
Why is the Kenyan bill still not enacted? Bwana Ndemo? Edith ________________ Edith Ofwona Adera Senior Program Specialist Climate Change and Water Program Agriculture and Environment International Development Research Centre Regional Office for Eastern and Southern Africa Liason House 2nd floor, State House Avenue, Nairobi, Kenya +254-20-2713160/1 | Fax: +254-20-2711063 | Mobile: +254-733-624345|Ext 3406 eadera@idrc.ca | www.idrc.ca | www.crdi.ca From: kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+eadera=idrc.or.ke@lists.kictanet.or.ke] On Behalf Of Evans Ikua Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 10:05 AM To: Edith Adera Cc: ke-users; KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: [kictanet] Freedom of Information Bill and Open Standards Apologies for cross-posting. The Peruvian Government in 2005 passed a law mandating the use of Free/Libre software in all Government agencies (bodies funded by the tax payer). I have reproduced some excerpts here below that tie in with our Freedom of Information Bill (and to a large extent the Data Protection Bill). Please note that the use of the term free is not to be confused to mean free of cost, but more about liberty, openness, open standards and access to source code. "The guarantee of these rights in our Constitution is not solely based on the good will of the State's agents to fulfill the norms of the Constitution, but also based on the use of technologies that in some cases contribute, and in others do not, to an effective protection of said citizens' rights. It is in this context of utmost importance for the State to implement those technologies that help reinforce the exercise of the right of citizens' to access information and to withhold it in cases that require so. The use of Free Software in all of the State's agencies points in this direction. Basically, we can say that the fundamental principles that drive the present Bill are tightly related to the basic guarantees of a democratic State and we can sum them up in the following: * Free Access of the citizens to public information * Pereniality of public data * Security of the State and of the citizens To guarantee the citizens' free access to information, it is indispensable that the coding of the data not be tied to a sole provider. The use of standard and open formats guarantees this free access, making possible the creation of compatible software. To guarantee the pereniality of public data, it is indispensable that the use and maintenance of software does not depend on the good will of the providers, nor of monopolic conditions, imposed by them. Systems can be guaranteed by the availability of the source code. To guarantee national security it is vital to have systems that are devoid of elements that allow remote control or the transmission of non-desired information to third-parties. Therefore, it is required to have systems whose source code is freely accessible to the public, so that its inspection be allowed by the State, the citizens and a great number of freelance experts in the world." Please see the following links for more info: Peru's Bill - Use of free software in Government agencies<http://opensource.org/docs/bill-EngTrans.php> Peruvian Congressman refutes Microsoft's "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt" (F.U.D.) concerning free and open source software.<http://opensource.org/docs/peru_and_ms.php> Now, looking at our Freedom of Information Bill, the right to access of information by citizens is also anchored in the constitution under Article 35 of the Constitution. But the FOI does not make any reference to the method of processing or storage of that data and information by tghe public bodies. Part VII, Section 49, says "Every public authority or private body shall operate and maintain digital records" There are two weaknesses with this particular section: 1. Is the Government mandated to require Private (bodies) companies to maintain digital records? Is this what the Bill aims to achieve? Or is it targeted at particular private bodies that deal with public data, say Banks or Hospitals? How does one differentiate? Maybe it needs to be a bit more specific 2. he requirement to maintain digital records also needs to go further and demand that such records must be maintained in an open and standard format, without tying the public to specific proprietary formats. As indicated in the above excerpt from the Peruvian Act, it is pretty obvious that the technology used has a large bearing to the access of information to citizens. There are certain instances where even web based applications in certain public bodies could only work on certain browsers. This denies all the right to access such public information. At the same time, storing public data in proprietary formats means that the availability of such data in the long term depends on the survival and availability of the particular vendor (pereniality of public data). This also extends to the processing systems. Fast forward to 2013, would the IEBC be able to give access to the source code of the softwares that it will use in its operations for public audit and scrutiny? What if someone has a problem with the electronic voter registration or voting and feels that they need to have access to that code so as to ensure transparency? And what about all other public bodies? In the mean time, if I was to ask for information from a public body, what formats will I get the information in? Will those formats still be supported 20 years from now? Will the vendor require that we upgrade our systems (of course at additional costs) for us to continue getting access? To answer these questions, the FOI needs to be very specific and demand that all public bodies process and store data in open and standard formats that are not vendor specific, nor proprietary. As tax payers and the people paying for these entities, we have a right to demand this. -- ---------------------------------------------------- Kind Regards, Evans Ikua, lanetconsulting.com<http://lanetconsulting.com>, lpi-eastafrica.org<http://lpi-eastafrica.org>, ict-innovation.fossfa.net<http://ict-innovation.fossfa.net>, Skype: @ikuae Cell: +254-722-955831
Interesting observations Evans. I would be interested to know what the Directorate of E-government has done especially with regard to facilitating digitisation of processes, collection and release of data by government, such that they would be able to tell us the kind of formats that are being used and whether these standards are indeed open, and if not why. Btw, is there a govt position on the use open standards? Likewise, and with regard to IEBC process, we would need to be informed whether the software in use is open source. I am not sure about the release of code to the general masses - but probably it would be useful to IT security experts for audit. Nevertheless, it would be important to release information on how the software & the process works as part of their responsibility in being transparent & accountable - i just saw them launch sth on telly today. Lastly, on FOI, for me its not so much what the bill should or shouldn't say, but its more our interpretation of Art. 35 of the Constitution. Such that any technology (e.g. icts, open standards, open data, open govt, digitisation etc) that would facilitate the right are adopted and promoted and technologies or practices e.g. not keeping data in electronic format - as mentioned by Rad! above, would be abolished as they inhibit and frustrate the enjoyment of the right. My two cents. Victor -- Victor Kapiyo, LL.B ==================================================== *“Your attitude, not your aptitude, will determine your altitude” Zig Ziglar *
Edith, We have done everything that needs to be done. Now it is stuck at CIC. Only you can push it out of here. Ndemo. Sent from my BlackBerry® -----Original Message----- From: Edith Adera <eadera@idrc.or.ke> Sender: "kictanet" <kictanet-bounces+bitange=jambo.co.ke@lists.kictanet.or.ke>Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 13:45:15 To: <bitange@jambo.co.ke> Cc: ke-users<ke-internetusers@bdix.net>; KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions<kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Freedom of Information Bill and Open Standards _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/bitange%40jambo.co.ke 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.
participants (5)
-
bitange＠jambo.co.ke -
Edith Adera -
Evans Ikua -
Rad! -
Victor Kapiyo