AIPPA provisions Section 17(1)(e) protection of information relating to or used in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. An exception to this is given in Sec 17(3) Issue FOI Bill proposed provisions Some prosecutions are of public The Bill is silent on this. interest and have a bearing on public welfare, for example, prosecutions against corruption. There should therefore be no blanket ban against accessing information relating to or used in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion Recommendations Information relating to or used in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion must not be generally exempted from being accessed. The Zimbabwe Media Commission had excessive powers over the voluntary disclosure of information. For example, in terms of Section 28, ZMC must be notified before the disclosure of information, including information that is in the public interest or related to public safety. The Zimbabwe Media Commission exists to promote and foster media freedoms in Zimbabwe. Section 249 (1)(f) of the Constitution says the ZMC has a role to ensure access to information. This role must be interpreted in line with media freedom. i. The Bill gives the ZMC powers to i. oversee the exercise and enjoyment of the right to access information by administering the Freedom of Information Bill when becomes law. ii. ii. Sec 18 of the Bill says the ZMC must receive reports on statistics about information requests iii. received in a given year. iii. Sec 35 of the Bill says the ZMC will be responsible for hearing appeals over denied requests for information. AIPPA does not provide for appeal procedures against decisions to deny access to requested information. The head of the public entity has the final say in the information request chain. Unreasonable and unjustifiable There must be appeal procedures to ensure that denials of access to requested information are fair and justifiable in an open and democratic society. A body that is independent of the entity appealed against must hear The FOI Bill provides the right to appeal in Section 35. These appeals are heard and finalised by the Zimbabwe Media Commission. The Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission and not the ZMC is the guardian of human rights in Zimbabwe. This includes the right to access information. The ZHRC is better suited to deal with the administration of a freedom of information law. The ZHRC will interpret the right to access information in a much wider context than the ZMC and should therefore, be given the task of overseeing the protection and promotion of the right to access information in Zimbabwe. i. A court of law such as the High Court should be the final arbiter in settling disputes over the denial of access to requested information. ii. Rulings by such a court of law would further enrich the 5