SWAZILAND RESEARCH CONCLUSION The study shows that there is a moderate level of openness in public institutions in Swaziland. However, as you move away from the central government ministries to semi-independent public institutions, there is a high level of openness. For example, the study indicates that government parastatals and institutions outside of ministries have a high level of openness. The study also shows that public institutions that have officers designated to deal with information requests have a high level of openness. There are however several factors that contribute to the secretive nature of public institutions in Swaziland. These factors include, among others, the high level of bureaucracy within the departments. Fifty percent of the participating institutions insisted on having the requests directed to the most senior official despite them having officers who are responsible for disseminating information. For example, all the government ministries do not consider their information officers when dealing with requests for information but resort to having the Principal Secretary respond. Notably, the junior officers within these institutions display a desire to be open and responsive to information requests, but the fact that they cannot respond is disappointing. The central nature of information flow within public institutions inhibits accessibility to public information. For example, senior officials hold onto some duties that should be done by their subordinates, and subsequently end up not responding to information requests on time. THE MOST SECRETIVE PUBLIC INSTITUTION IN SWAZILAND Three of the participating institutions did not provide the requested information, although they had promised to respond. All these institutions misplaced the requests and their officials were unavailable to attend to the requests when they were resent. The Ministry of Education and Training receives the 2014 Golden Padlock award for the most secretive public institution in Swaziland with a total 14/60. THE MOST OPEN PUBLIC INSTITUTION IN SWAZILAND Out of the eight participating institutions, only five responded to the requests for information. All of these institutions responded to both written and oral requests. Of these institutions, only three – NERCHA, the Smart Partnership Secretariat and the Swaziland Competition Commission – have designated information officers who are able to receive and process requests instantaneously. The Human Rights Commission and EBC’s information requests were directed to senior officials, who are frequently unavailable. Despite this challenge, the two institutions were able to provide the necessary assistance, although after long delays. In relation to the first category of the research, which dealt with the usefulness 88 of the website, NERCHA and the Swaziland Competition Commission proved to have the most informative and useful websites in the study. The overall winner for the most open public institution in 2014 goes to NERCHA with a score of 53/60. RECOMMENDATIONS In order to ensure openness in public institutions, communication and information officers must be empowered to deal with public requests for information. Also, public institutions must recruit information officers and make them available to deal with information requests. Furthermore, government ministries and departments must regularly update their websites so that accurate and relevant information is made available.