NAMIBIA INTRODUCTION It is unfortunate that we have to release yet another assessment of Namibia’s access to information environment, without the country actually having a law that legislates the public’s right to access to information. Government on several occasions has indicated its intention to have this law passed by 28 September 2017, but sadly this does not seem to be the case. It is highly questionable as to why this was not achieved, considering the amount of advocacy work done in 2016 by the media and civil society, in partnership with the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT). The first draft of an Access to Information (ATI) Bill was developed during a consultation meeting. In addition to that, civil servants, civil society and media representatives revised the National Information Policy. Most recommendations related to updating Government’s methods of sharing and receiving information in the age of the Internet and social media. The revised National Information Policy was adopted this year, and quite rightly, received very little criticism from the media, civil society and the public at large. We also set the foundation for a Communications Strategy for Government during this consultation, which, as far as we know, has not yet been adopted. It is important to note that the consultation was initiated by the MICT, for which they must be commended. However, it is now more than a year later, and we are anxiously waiting for the ATI Bill to be tabled in Parliament. After the Bill’s first tabling, it will go through a public consultation process. It is our hope that this will be broad-based and take place across the country. Historically, Namibians are not very engaged in the public consultation process. This can be ascribed to the fact that there is not sufficient public notification of when and where it will take place. The level of the public’s engagement is dependent on how much awareness is raised on the issue through the media, and whether civil society has capacitated the public to understand the issue at hand. In this case, can we as media and civil society organisations confidently state that we have done our best in ensuring that citizens understand what access to information entails, as well as how its lack negatively affects the realisation of basic human rights? We are also awaiting the repeal of several secrecy laws. These include the Protection of Information Act (1982), the Defence Act (2002), the National Security Act (1997) and the Public Service Act (1997). These laws limit citizens’ ability to access information, as well as making the disclosure of public information without the permission of the Permanent Secretary a disciplinary offence. Additionally, the Communications Act (2009) permits the interception of e-mail, text messages, Internet banking transactions, and telephone calls without a warrant. This law threatens the media’s independence and ability to conduct effective investigative journalism. Civil society and the media need to renew their efforts in calling for the repeal of these aforementioned laws and/or their problematic clauses. Namibia also needs to ratify and domesticate the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance and the African Statistics Charter. These instruments promote access to 60 information, accountability and transparency. The Electronic Transactions and Communications Bill has been on the shelves for a number of years. When first tabled, the Bill received considerable resistance from civil society because, if passed, it would have resulted in Government legally violating citizens’ right to privacy. The law gave Government the right to conduct search and seizure operations of databases and computers, intercept data and communications, and remotely monitor them for a period of up to three months. It also obliged telecommunications service providers, or any other entity that may have information relating to a matter of interest to Government, to cooperate and provide all relevant data. The Bill was referred back to the line ministry and we hope that legal drafters have in the meantime found a way to navigate between legislating surveillance and the seizure of personal data in the interest of national security, and constitutional provisions relating to freedom of expression and the right to privacy. A major concern in regard to access to information, particularly for the media, is aNovember 2016 Cabinet Resolution directing all government departments to prioritise the dissemination of information and advertisement through the state-owned New Era Publication Corporation and Namibia Broadcasting Corporation (NBC). The resolution negatively affects the public’s right to information, as not all citizens regularly access state-owned media, andbecause a reduction in advertising revenue will result in a decline of independent media’s financial sustainability. However, this year saw the passing of the Witness Protection Act and the Whistleblower Protection Bill. Government has to be commended for removing problematic clauses from the Whistleblower Protection Bill after intense lobbying by civil society. It is in such instances that one is reminded of the importance of a vibrant and responsive civil society, as well as a free and independent media for a thriving democracy. It is our hope that these sectors will remain committed and able to uphold their mandate, and that Government remains open and responsive to broad-based consultation. Rationale and ReseaRch PaRaMeteRs This year’s study focused on four government ministries and four government departments. The study’s aim was to assess their accessibility and responsiveness to the public’s demand for information. Research was conducted from July to September 2017. The study indicates how transparent each public institution is by applying prescribed tools that measure the level of responsiveness of each chosen institution within a specific period of time. The study’s results will inform MISA’s work in regard to the promotion and protection of freedom of expression, which cannot be realised without access to information. The following public institutions were surveyed: 1. Ministry of Poverty Eradication and Social Welfare (MPESW) 2. Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) 3. Ministry of Industrialisation, Trade and SME Development (MTI)