BACKGROUND Since 2009, the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) has evaluated the level of openness of government and public institutions in its annual Transparency Assessment. Carried out by MISA Chapters alongside local researchers, the study seeks to establish the ease or difficulty with which citizens can access public information. The study assesses whether public institutions proactively make relevant information available via an online presence in the form of a website or social media accounts. It further evaluates to what degree information is made available to citizens upon request. Every year, on 28 September, MISA joins the international community in commemorating the International Day for Universal Access to Information. MISA marks the occasion through: The regional launch of the MISA Transparency Assessment Hosting National Golden Key and Golden Padlock Awards Ceremonies 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). Public organisations fall into one of the following groups in accordance with the number of points they received: Category 1: Website Analysis Group 1 (0–6): Group 2 (07–13): 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: Requests for Information Group 1 (0–6): DATA ANALYSIS Category 1: Evaluation of government and public institution websites to determine the accessibility and presence of credible and updated public information, which includes but is not limited to: powers and functions of the institution in question, budgetary allocations, procurement procedures and contact details. Category 2: In this category, information requests are submitted to government and public institutions in order to determine the ease with which public information is obtained from government and public institutions. Absence of a website or an extremely poor website containing no or almost no relevant public information. Denied access to reasonable information requested or acted with high levels of secrecy. Group 2 (07–13): Displayed an average level of openness in allowing access to public information. Group 3 (14–20): Displayed openness in allowing access to public information. The institution was helpful and transparent. The following countries were surveyed in this 2020 MISA Transparency Assessment: Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe. 1