REGIONAL OVERVIEW

REGIONAL OVERVIEW
This study carried out between May and June 2013, seeks to
establish levels of transparency in public institution in Southern
Africa. The study in currently in its fourth year, and findings
highlight the difficulties faced by Southern African when trying to
seek, access and receive information from public bodies.
The research, conducted by seven different MISA chapters in the
region, again revealed the lack of openness, transparency and
accessibility on the part of public institutions, as well as their
reluctance to disclose information proactively or respond to
specific requests for public information, although there has been
a significant improvement with respect to the use of information
communication technologies (ICTs) across the region.
In particular, when it comes to requests of information in oral
or written form, the study shows that the majority of public
institutions remain reluctant or unwilling to respond to inquiries.
In Malawi only three institutions responded, the presence of
Information or Communications officers was observed as a mere
strategy to create a positive image of the organisations and not to
be proactive tools of engagement with anyone seeking information.
Following requests for information, half of the institutions surveyed
responded in Swaziland and Zambia, whilst three out of eight
provided relevant information in Tanzania, Malawi and Namibia.
Follow-up calls and visits by the requesters were unhelpful, often
resulting in empty promises to provide the information later. In
addition, requests for information often resulted in referrals to
another person, who was either unavailable or unhelpful, or to the
public body’s website, on which not all the information requested
was available.
According to the survey, Botswana appears to be the country
with the most secretive public institutions with only one public
institution providing the information as requested, and generally
appear reluctant to provide information without questioning the
identity and motivation of the information seeker.
It is important to emphasise, however, that some institutions
made a tremendous effort to respond quickly and answer all the
questions posed by the requester. In Zambia, for instance, the
researcher was called by the representatives of three institutions
(Zambia Public Procurement Authority, the Ministry of Health, and
the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Services ) to provide her
with the requested information, shortly after information requests
had been submitted. In Namibia, two institutions (the Motor
Vehicle Accident Fund, and the Ministry of Agriculture Water and
Forestry) invited the researcher for an interview to discuss and
elaborate on the questions posed by the requester.
Despite a general reluctance to respond to written and oral
requests for information, It is important to note that there has
been an increase in the use of ICTs in the provision of information,
potentially providing citizens with faster access to documents,

publications and other relevant publications.
In Tanzania, Swaziland, Botswana, Namibia and Zambia, all the in
Introduction
institutions surveyed have a website, however, the relevance of
the information provided differs greatly between institutions. For
example, in Namibia websites are of average standard, although
most sites are user-friendly, some still lack relevant up-to date
information, and in Tanzania only one Ministry had all of the
relevant information sought for the purposes of this study.
However, one encouraging development with respect to Tanzania
is that most bodies try to provide information in both English
and Swahili, which means that information can be understood by
the majority of the country’s population. Similarly in Swaziland,
only one institution provided adequate information, leaving the
potential of ICTs insufficiently utilised.
Overall improvements compared to previous years, could be
observed in Botswana, where the accessibility of some relevant
information is enabled through the websites of the majority of
institutions surveyed. It deserves mentioning, however, that all the
websites are dependent on a government portal, and hence do not
have any individual online representation.
Malawi is lagging behind, with only two institutions surveyed
having active websites.
Since the initiation of this study in 2010, overall improvements have
been seen in both the accessibility of information held by public
institutions, as well as the use of ICTs to facilitate easier access. In
Tanzania, the study resulted in the winner of last year’s Golden Key
Award acknowledging weaknesses uncovered in the 2012 report,
who in turn promised the continuous improvement of the Ministry
of Finance with regard to its openness and accessibility.

Research Methodology
The research will adopt qualitative and quantitative methods of
data collection, and seek to assess the level of public access to
information held by government and pubic institutions. In order
to achieve this each chapter will conduct research by evaluating
the websites of government and public Institutions, along with
submitting oral and written reports requesting information. This
method will seek to establish the transparency and efficiency of
government and public institutions in providing information to the
public.

Data Analysis
Category 1: Evaluation of government and public
institution websites to determine the accessibility of public
information.
Category 2: Submission of oral and written reports in order to
determine the ease of which public information is obtained form
government and public institutions.

5

Select target paragraph3