NAMIBIA INTRODUCTION At the time of the writing of this report, Namibia had a working document, which is expected to transform into an Access to Information Bill before the end of 2016. This is a major achievement for the Access to Information in Namibia (ACTION) Coalition, which has campaigned for such a law since early 2013. Not only did the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT) finally deliver on its promise to develop such a law, but they also consulted with civil servants, media houses and civil society on the working document as well as on the revision of their Information Policy. The Ministry has to be applauded for consulting with stakeholders from the onset, and not waiting for the Bill to be tabled in Parliament first. Namibia is efficient at policy development and establishing a framework to operate within, but we have a long way to go with regards to effective implementation. Hence the need for these collaborative efforts to continue into the implementation phase. Civil society, the private sector and the media require Government’s cooperation to ensure that every citizen has an understanding of the rights, freedoms and responsibilities that come with accessing information. There is no point in having a good law that is not implemented, without holding stakeholders accountable when they don’t reach implementation targets. With regards to the media and access to information, journalists continue to lament the difficulty in accessing information from most public institutions which leads to a delay in the provision of information that is in the public’s interest. Furthermore, the lack of quotable information from official government sources, especially related to corruption and poor service delivery, results in journalists having to rely on anonymous sources. We are still awaiting a whistleblowers protection law, which can go a long way in the eradication of corruption, because it means those who are brave enough to disclose corrupt elements within the public service will be protected from prosecution or victimisation. The Anti-Corruption Commission was the frontrunner in the call for such a law, but it has been silent on the issue for the past year. The ACTION Coalition will have to accept the responsibility of lobbying for the development of such a law, because transparency and good governance cannot exist without protecting those who risk their jobs to expose corruption. There have also been no new developments with regards to the Electronic Transactions and Cybercrime Bill, which is probably for the best because there were a number of concerns raised on the first draft. It is important for stakeholders to be consulted on the second draft and we are committed to ensuring that the public’s right to ATI and privacy, as well as their freedom of expression, is upheld. Namibia must honour its obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights and the SADC Protocol on Culture, Information and Sport. ATI has been positioned as a critical ingredient in the attainment of the objectives of both the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Namibian government’s Harambee Prosperity Plan (HPP). Regarding access to public information, the HPP commits to ensuring that citizens have access to relevant government information, and for the MICT to develop a plan for aligning the functions of the Public Relations and Liaison Officers to their core functions of information dissemination. In addition, permissible access to information by the public must also be included in the plan. An ATI dispensation will lead to the establishment of a law and policy landscape that exemplifies the principled spirit of respect for human rights and freedoms as articulated in the Constitution of the Republic of Namibia. Rationale and ReseaRch PaRaMeteRs Access to information is an essential human right that supports all other rights. Research on the Most Open and Secretive Public Institutions in Namibia shows that there is a lack of transparency within public bodies, and adds weight to the call for ATI legislation. The research was conducted from 2 August to 30 August. Institutions were given 21 days to respond to requests. In Namibia, eight institutions were studied. The research included the study of their responses to requests for information, and evaluated websites and social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter. The objective of the study was to measure the openness as well as difficulties faced by public institutions in providing information to the public. The study looked at whether the sampled offices made available the information without questioning the intentions of those requesting it. The results of the study will continue to inform our work in relation to access to information. The following public institutions were surveyed: 1. National Council of Namibia (NC) 2. Ministry of Youth, National Service and Sport (MSYNS) 3. Ministry of Industrial Trade and SME Development (MTI) 4. Ministry of International Relations and Cooperation (MIRCO) 5. Ministry of Poverty Eradication and Social Welfare (MPESW) 6. Ministry of Finance (MoF) 7. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) 8. Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC)