TANZANIA

Rationale and ReseaRch
PaRaMeteRs
MISA Tanzania joined other MISA Chapters in participating in a
study to establish the most open and secretive government and
public institutions in southern Africa. The study started on the
4th of July 2016 and was concluded on the 26th of July 2016.
Seven of the eight institutions picked have been named the most
open institutions in Tanzania since the start of the study in 2009.
The goal was to find out which one of the most open institutions
was actually the ‘most open’.
The eigth institution assessed, the Occupational Safety and
Health Agency, is a recently-established public agency, which
was picked by the researcher to see how it compared to
established ones.
The following public institutions were surveyed:
1. Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA)
2. Occupational Safety and Health Agency (OSHA)
3. Ministry of Finance (MoF)
4. Ministry of Water and Irrigation (MWI)
5. National Bureau of Statistics (NBS)
6. Ministry of Energy and Mineral (MEM)
7. Ministry of Constitution and Legal Affairs (MOCLA)
8. National Housing Cooperation (NHC)

Research Methodology

The research adopted qualitative and quantitative methods of
data collection and sought to assess the level of public access
to information held by government and public institutions. In
order to achieve this, research was conducted by evaluating
the websites of government and public institutions, along with
their feedback to information requests. This method sought to
establish government and public institutions’ transparency and
efficiency in providing information to the public.

SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS
Category 1: Website analysis
•

•

•

•

•

•

Category 2: Requests for information
•

The researcher had the request letters hand-delivered and sent
via email to the addresses of the respective institutions.
The requests for information were sent on 4thand 5th of July
2016 and dispatches were signed by the responsible persons. A
week later, follow-ups were conducted via telephone.

Limitations of the Study
•

•

•

74

Acknowledging receipts of request letters is still a challenge
to some agencies and ministries. It is an embedded culture
that would probably take time to outdate. When a letter
is sent, someone receives it and signs the dispatch form
and hands it over it to the intended recipient. This person
however, does not acknowledge the receipt of the letter.
This year, some of those required to receive the letters did
not even want to sign the dispatch form neither would they
give out their contact details. The picture one gets is that no
one wants to be held liable.
Limited resources.

Most of the websites surveyed are up-to-date.
The websites are transparent and well-organised,
providing a sufficient amount of relevant public
information. The websites provide directions to the
office; some have even maps, contact details and
working hours.
Most of the websites had several links to other
government sites, improving information seeking
and sharing. The Ministry of Energy scored highly
(18 points) with the recently-established Occupation
Safety & Health Authority (OSHA) scoring only 7
points.
It was observed that, while the OSHA website
contained some key information, other vital
information was missing; more updates and relevant
information are needed.
The social networks linked to these sites are not
frequently updated; the social networks of the
Occupation Safety & Health Authority (OSHA) for
instance, were last updated in January 2016.
Most of the websites arein both national languages
(English and Swahili), overcoming the language
barrier and increasing the number of people that
can access information.
Most offices have websites and it was observed
that the information posted is often up-to-date and
downloadable documents are provided.

•

•

•

All the institutions surveyed had their contacts
and email addresses on their websites, but not all
were active since some of the emails sent failed
permanently such as that sent to the Ministry
of Lands Housing and Human Settlements
Development.
Modes of responding to requests interestingly
differed from one institution to another. There were
those who were quick to respond to emails, while
others responded by telephone. But there were also
those who simply found difficulties with everything
and never responded.
Two of the institutions surveyed, requested the
researcher to physically visit their offices and obtain
the information needed rather than responding via
email or letter. The institutions were the National
Housing Corporation and the National Social
Security Fund.
One institution, the National Bureau of Statistics
responded to the request for information on the
fourth day. They sent an email and a message to
the researcher to check the email and visit their
website.

Select target paragraph3