BOTSWANA AIM OF THE STUDY The main goal of this study is to assess the level of transparency of government and public institutions in the country. The survey results will serve as empirical evidence for the ongoing campaign to encourage government to enact access to information legislation. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY s 4O ASSESS THE LEVEL OF TRANSPARENCY IN GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC institutions against international standards and principles of access to information. s 4O INmUENCE THE ADOPTION OF PRACTICES LAWS AND A CULTURE THAT promotes transparency and openness in government and public institutions. s 4O INFORM ADVOCACY AND INTERVENTIONS BY -)3! "OTSWANA AND civil society across the country. s 4O ENCOURAGE CITIZENS TO EXERCISE THEIR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO access information generated, held and under the control of government institutions necessary for accessing other social economic rights. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The research adopts qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection, and seeks to evaluate the level of public access to information held by government and public institutions. Each MISA Chapter conducts research by evaluating the websites of government and public institutions along with submitting oral and written requests for information. This method seeks 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 access and presence of credible and updated public information, which includes but is not limited to: powers and functions of the institution in question; vacancy and budgetary allocations; procurement procedures and contact details and reports. Category 2: This category was divided into two sections, namely written questionnaires and oral requests for information. These instruments were adopted to determine the ease with which public information is obtained from government and public institutions. Category 1: Website Analysis Group 1: (0 – 6) Absence of a website or an extremely poor website containing no or almost no relevant public information. Group 2: (7 – 13) Average website containing some relevant public information. Group 3: (14 – 20) Well organised, transparent website providing a good amount of relevant public information. Category 2: Written Request/Oral Request Group 1: (0 – 6) Denied access to reasonable information request or acted with high levels of secrecy. Group 2: (7 – 13) Displayed an average level of openness in allowing access to public information. Group 3: (14 – 20) Displayed openness in allowing access to public information. Institution was helpful and transparent. SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS Category 1: Website Analysis s /F THE EIGHT GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS SURVEYED lVE HAD THEIR own individual websites. The remaining three had brief pages hosted by the Botswana government website (www.gov.bw). s 4HE SURVEY ALSO REVEALED THAT ONLY HALF OF THE SURVEYED government institutions had updated information on their websites. The remaining half had outdated information, eg the Ministry of Youth Sports and Culture website does not appear to have been updated since 2012. s /F THE EIGHT GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS SURVEYED ONLY ONE website, that of the Ministry of Infrastructure, Science and Technology, featured a budget (but no expenditure report). Category 2: Requests for Information s /F THE EIGHT INSTITUTIONS SURVEYED ONLY THE -INISTRY OF ,OCAL Government rejected a written request for information upon submission, while the remaining seven written requests managed to reach the intended Public Relations office. s /NE LETTER OF REQUEST FOR THE -INISTRY OF %NVIRONMENT Wildlife and Tourism, had to be re-sent after follow up calls established that the initial one had reportedly been lost. s !LL OF THE SEVEN INSTITUTIONS THAT ACCEPTED THE LETTERS acknowledged receipt, but didn’t respond to the questions, despite confirmation that they reached the Public Relations offices to which they were addressed. s !LL MINISTRIES CAUTIONED THAT INFORMATION COULD ONLY BE released if the letter clearly stated the researcher’s name and the intended use for such information. Description of Assessment Criteria The total number of points allocated to categories 1 and 2 is 20 points (n = 20) each. Points are awarded based on the researcher’s answer: Yes (2 points); Partial (1 point); No (0 points). Government ministries and institutions fell into one of the following groups in accordance with the number of points that they received. 11