14
bodies expeditiously and inexpensively. The
blockage of journalists from covering court
proceedings of former Malawian President
Peter Mutharika goes against the principle of
accessing information from public bodiesin
the public interest, and the standards of open
justice and open parliament which require
journalists to cover courts and parliaments
on behalf of the public. Principle 28 also
calls for maximum disclosure, stating that
access to information may only be limited
by narrowly defined exemptions, which
shall be provided by law and shall comply
strictly with international human rights law
and standards.
Under Principle 33 of the Declaration,
information may only be legitimately
withheld where the harm to the interest
protected under the relevant exemption
demonstrably outweighs the public interest
in disclosure of the information, and such
information may only be withheld for the
period that the harm could occur. Further, it is
a requirement to put in place laws that would
allow exemptions including classification
of information, which shall stipulate the
maximum period of the classification and
restrict classification only to the extent
necessary, and not indefinitely. In order to
legitimately withhold information, it must
be proven that as a result of the disclosure,
substantial prejudice may be caused to
third parties including national security
and safety of individuals. In this regard,
Lesotho failed to meet the legal standards
on classification of information, as stated
under Principle 33.
Despite having no access to information
law in place, Lesotho conformed to Principle
29 of the Declaration through ensuring
proactive disclosure by the Parliamentary
Accounts Committee. Under proactive
disclosure, public bodies are required,
even in the absence of a specific request,
to proactively publish and disseminate
through available mediums, information of
public interest, including information about
their functions, powers, structure, officials,
decisions, budgets, expenditure and other
information relating to their activities.
However, following the Transparency
Assessment, where many public institutions
denied citizens access to information, it is
recommended that Lesotho enacts access
to information laws as stipulated under
Principle 26 of the Declaration, and further
establishes an independent and impartial
oversight mechanism to monitor, promote
and protect the right of access to information
and resolve disputes as per Principle 34.

Namibia and Zambia’s efforts to enact
access to information bills is a welcome
step towards fulfilling Principle 26 of
the Declaration, although we urge that
these laws are in tandem with regional
and international standards on access
to
information.
However,
Namibia’s
preferential treatment of state media goes
against Principle 14, which provides that
States shall promote a diverse private
media as vehicles for the development and
dissemination of a variety of content in the
public interest. Further, Zambia’s closure of
media houses, and Eswatini’s ban on news
articles also offends basic tenets of the
right to freedom of expression and access
to information under Principle 10, which
includes the right to seek, receive and
impart information and ideas, through any
other form of communication or medium,
including across frontiers.
Under Principle 40 all have the right to
privacy, including the confidentiality of their
communications and the protection of their
personal information. Any indiscriminate
surveillance of personal communication,
as threatened by Zimbabwe would infringe
on Principle 41 of the Declaration which
provides that States shall not engage in
or condone acts of indiscriminate and
untargeted collection, storage, analysis or
sharing of a person’s communications.

IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC
Covid-19 has posed a threat to the already
existing sustainability and viability issues faced by
media houses. The pandemic led to significantly
reduced budgets due to a slump in advertising
revenue; and increased cost of production which
has caused several lay-offs of journalists and
media workers. Media houses have painfully had
to suspend or downsize their print operations,
with some opting for online operations and
distribution, amidst technological challenges.
The pandemic has also further revealed safety
vulnerabilities of journalists, with some struggling
to adapt to digital trends to curb the pandemic,
while others lack safety gear.
In Angola, Grupo Medianova, a privately owned
media house, dismissed several journalists citing
financial difficulties despite Presidential Decree
18/20, which prohibited dismissals during the
state of emergency caused by the pandemic.
The lack of personal protective equipment also
reportedly led to eight journalists contracting the
novel coronavirus in the capital, Luanda.
In Botswana, the Botswana Gazette, after

Select target paragraph3