INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
Sankhitha Gunaratne is one of latest Chevening Scholars from Sri Lanka, chosen to pursue a higher degree in the United Kingdom
She will be reading for an MA in Corruption and Governance at the University of Sussex
In this interview with Nalaka Gunawardene, she looks back at RTI implementation so far and takes stock of the remaining challengesSeptember
28 marks the International Day for the Universal Access to Information designated by UNESCO
It celebrates the right to information or RTI, which was added to the Constitution of Sri Lanka as a fundamental right in April 2015 and
later supported by the Right to Information Act No 12 of 2016.Before and after the law was passed, Attorney-at-Law Sankhitha Gunaratne has
been at the forefront in promoting RTI
As Program Manager for RTI at Transparency International Sri Lanka (TISL), she has helped train hundreds of public officials on RTI
compliance and facilitated over 2,100 citizens to file RTI applications with a wide range of public bodies
In 2016, she was part of the RTI Advisory Task Force to the Ministry of Mass Media which helped the Ministry plan the implementation of the
RTI Act that came into effect in February 2017
Earlier, she was also a member of the TISL legal team that intervened with the Supreme Court in support of the RTI Bill after it was
gazetted.Q: Sri Lanka RTI Act, together with regulations, have been assessed and ranked highly by the Centre for Law and Democracy (CLD)
that compiles Global RTI Ratings
What is your assessment of our RTI law and regulations?I agree that we have a very strong legal regime
As a country that enacted the law quite late, we have used all the experience of the region to formulate a good system.One of the key
features of this law, is that it resets the power imbalance between the State and the individual citizen
Information is often the capital that the State has, that shuts citizens out of meaningful participation and any demand of true
accountability.The law normalises the idea of accountability, specifically removing the need for citizens to give reasons for an information
It captures any information that is on record
It further operates on the principle of maximum disclosure, always prioritizing the public interest even where some harm may be caused to
privacy, national security, or other interests & where the overriding public interest can be demonstrated.There are a few things that could
For example, the way the Commission is set up could have envisaged provincial commissions
All persons & and not just citizens & could have been included as being able to file RTIs.
However, as TISL stated before the Supreme Court
in the Bill Determination, the law is an excellent piece of legislation that I and my organisation unequivocally support
Its full implementation is what we need now.
Q: Having a fine law is not sufficient & the real test is in implementation
On the RTI ‘supply side&, what is working well and what needs to improve?It has been difficult to assess implementation of the RTI law in
So far, we have hundreds of success stories from RTI users
People have begun using RTI to hold the state accountable, and to expose acts of corruption, inefficiency and abuse of power and process
And as a country that is in the initial stages of implementation, we must congratulate ourselves on the progress made.But even as we hear
these stories, we must be conscious of the fact that success is not the experience of all RTI users
A lot of the success stories have required citizens to go the extra mile and follow up on the RTI & because acknowledgments are not
received, notices are not sent, or timelines are not adhered to
This means people have to keep appealing, all the way to the Commission level at times
Those who do not know that entire process are then lost in the system, thinking that this is yet another tool that does not really work.Two
and a half years into RTI being operationalised, TISL was able to conduct an implementation assessment in 2019, to measure how well we are
performing in three assessment areas & proactive disclosure, institutional measures and responding to requests
The assessment has shown the positive elements in the supply side
Most public authorities have appointed information officers, and the district and divisional level authorities are performing well in RTI
implementation.
Q: You have been a promoter, trainer and user of RTI in the public interest
Where TISL RTI applications are concerned.What is the overall experience with public authorities?
What we have found is that TISL RTIs are
sometimes responded to with more attention that certain individual citizens& requests
Moreover, public institutions in the lower administrative level are more likely to respond positively than are central agencies & this may
also be due to the types of information requested.
We have found that RTI is an invaluable tool in buttressing all of our advocacy efforts
& be it to support any complaints to authorities, or even in forming our own opinions on certain issues.
As RTI trainers, we have in most
instances found public officials to be quite receptive
Often, the young ones are more open to the principles behind RTI, while the older tend to see it as an extra workload
However, most officials take their duties under the law very seriously, struggle with the practical angles & such as keeping count of the
various timelines, not knowing where to find the information and sometimes not receiving assistance from their colleagues.
Q: As an NGO,
TISL is covered by the RTI Act to the extent its activities are supported by public funds, local or foreign
How is TISL compliant with the RTI law?
We have our own information officer and designated officer, who function separately from each other
TISL has received RTI requests, all of which were responded to positively, where the information related to our public activities, as
In certain instances, we gave information even where we were not bound to do
We have also made our funding publicly available on our website, as this is one of the key questions people often have about NGOs.
Q: What
have been your main accomplishments in promoting RTI through TISL?
Soon after the law was passed, TISL began carrying out programs with
other civil society organisations and directly, to raise awareness on RTI
We also set up what we call ‘RTI hubs& in eight districts
We helped citizens to file RTI requests and helped them through the appeal stages where necessary, even appearing for them before the RTI
Commission.
We also committed ourselves to working in the villages in the local languages, encouraging people to address community issues
By now, over 2,100 citizens have filed RTIs with our assistance, 45% of them women
My role has been to oversee all these programs.
Q: On the ‘demand side& of RTI, what are your impressions based on your engagement with
citizens and their various groups?
My main observation is that people out of Colombo are using RTI much more than those in and around
This may be due to the fact that many citizen services in metropolitan areas are already provided.
When you look at the nature of these
RTIs & be it on road construction, government appointments, transport, medical services and education & it seems to point to a
service-delivery failure by the State
This means that citizens have turned to a tool that is currently working, to address parts of the system that are not working
While this system is effective, it is clear that sweeping changes are required to fix the problems that these RTIs have begun to
highlight.
It is also interesting that the first question that most people ask upon being introduced to RTI is whether they could get into
While the reasons for these fears may be historical and complicated, it shows that a lot needs to be done to change this mind-set from one
of challenging authority, to one of a casual accountability
This can only happen if the recipients of requests too see it less as an attack and more as a query.
Q: What strategies are needed to fill
gaps in public awareness and understanding of the RTI process?
One of the best ways to do this is to ensure that all public officials
understand RTI and use it as a normal means of communication with its stakeholders
It is easier to train the public service than to attempt to reach all citizens in the country, in the short term.
Imagine a public
authority that makes all its service-delivery information publicly available, routinely updates its notice board on recent decisions taken
and regularly opens its doors to citizens treating, each query as an RTI request.
If a certain query keeps arising, the public authority
immediately fixes the problem and makes that information available & using the RTI requests to point to an issue in their own
workings.
This is what we want to achieve in the short term
While this may seem utopian, it is no less than the law requires
This requires ongoing training not just for information officers, but for the entire public service.
For the moment, we are using RTI
success stories to publicize its effectiveness
Another step to take, is to identify and celebrate the users themselves
This would have a snowball effect, where they would become influencers in their community, with added recognition.
Q: There have been
instances where citizens seeking information from public authorities have been threatened or intimidated
What protection do you advocate for RTI users?
Where a citizen feels that there may be a threat, one of the main strategies we recommend is
to file the RTI as a group
It is much harder for an errant official to target a group.
Wherever there has been such threats or intimidation, India has used an
interesting strategy of immediately making sure that the information that was being sought, is made public
This acts as a disincentive to officials who may want to target people.
If something like this happens, the first recourse should be to the
RTI Commission, who has the power to recommend disciplinary action or prosecute
The Commission must take a firm stand in such instances
In addition to this, users could also seek assistance from the Victim and Witness Protection Authority
Q: What is your experience with the
RTI Commission? Is the Commission tough enough on errant/evasive public officials?
The Commission has in the majority of cases held in
favour of the citizen, ordering public authorities to release information
Having said this, there are many instances where public authorities are given several opportunities to appear, even where they have
disregarded the Commission dates
Given the amount of time between hearings, this causes major inconvenience to requesters who have already had to wait close to a year to get
In such instances, the Commission should make ex-parte decisions.
The Commission has stated that they are in the process of formulating
rules regarding prosecutions for errant officials
This is an important aspect of RTI that ensures compliance with the framework
It is vital that these provisions are put into effect soon, in order to demonstrate the State commitment to RTI.
The Commission has
responded to complaints against certain authorities or officials very seriously, asking them to show cause
In general, the Commission has been a proactive and responsive body, making bold and principled decisions, going so far as to hold regional
hearings and publishing important works, to keep abreast of changing needs
It is important to assure the Commission independence and autonomy for the years to come.
Q: Where do you wish to see Sri Lanka RTI process
in five and 10 years& time?
In five years, I would like to see RTI normalised across the State and among citizens
This requires that the initial enthusiasm for RTI implementation is sustained and grown
Greater resource allocation towards implementation would be a key indicator of such commitment.
There should ideally also be a net
reduction in RTI appeals as the first request level becomes more used to RTI compliance
In the short term, the number of RTIs filed per annum, should also increase, indicating a rise in awareness among citizens
Within this period, I would caution against any amendments to the RTI Act, whether such amendments are touted as being improvements, or
not.
In the longer term, I would like to see a reduction in the need for formal RTIs, as proactive disclosure becomes more the order of the
day within public institutions.
