ZAMBIA INTRODUCTION Over the past number of years, media bodies such the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) Zambia, the Zambia Union of Journalists (ZUJ), the Press Association of Zambia (PAZA), the Zambia Media Women Association (ZAMWA) and the Press Freedom Committee (PFC) of the Post Newspapers have campaigned tirelessly to mobilise support for the enactment of a law that will guarantee Zambians greater opportunities to access information. Under the previous regime, several appointed Ministers of Information and Broadcasting Services (MIBS) each promised to enact an access to information law. The Patriotic Front (PF) government campaigned strenuously on the premise that as soon as they came in to power the first thing they would do was enact an access to information (ATI) law, and even formed a task force, of which MISA was a part of, that would assist with both the drafting and enactment of such a law. The PF government has since changed its rhetoric and despite various promises to bring an ATI Bill to Parliament, has introduced delaying tactics on each occasion, which indicate no real willingness to do so. However, despite the unwavering campaign for the enactment of a law, which has stressed the importance of citizen’s access to information. The growing perception, especially by government and some sceptics within the public, is that the Bill, by and large, aims to benefit the media more than everybody else, as journalists would have considerably easier access to information than the general public, especially to information held by public officials. This notion has been challenged by both media bodies and other advocates who support the Bill, who maintain that the purpose of an ATI law is to empower the Zambian people and ensure a more participatory and democratic society, where the public can interact with government and influence public policies that affect their daily lives. RATIONALE AND RESEARCH PARAMETERS The researcher submitted written requests for information, as well as evaluated the websites of the selected institutions. Thereafter, the researcher made physical follow-ups as well as telephone calls to the institutions. This method sought to establish the transparency and efficiency of government and public institutions in providing information to the public. The research was undertaken between the 9th of June and the 11th July 2014. MISA Zambia selected government departments and public institutions which play a vital role in Zambia’s economy and development, and the welfare of the Zambian citizenry. The institutions include: 106 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Citizens Economic Empowerment Commission (CEEC) Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA) The Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) The Zambia Public Procurement Authority (ZPPA) The Ministry of Health (MoH) The Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Services (MALS) The Lusaka City Council (LCC) The Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) AIM OF THE STUDY The aim of the study was to assess the level of transparency and openness in government and public institutions in the country. From this survey it becomes evident that Zambia is in critical need of a freedom of information law. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY Some of the objectives of the research were to: s !SSESS THE LEVEL OF OPENNESS AND TRANSPARENCY IN GOVERNMENT and public institutions against international standards and principles of access to information. s %NCOURAGE CITIZENS TO EXERCISE THEIR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO access information generated and held under the control of government. Influence the adoption of practices, laws and culture that promotes transparency and openness in government and public institutions 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.