SECTOR 1

of its members on 11 December 2014, the Commission took its oath in May 2015
and began carrying out its activities. Focal points responsible for information are
in the process of being established in the public administration bodies.
Although this law constitutes an excellent initiative, panellists noted that it does,
however, contain some restrictions on public documents. They explained that
it is still difficult to obtain documents in the public interest, and noted that
waiting periods to obtain a document are relatively long. In effect, Article 12
of the CAIDP stipulates that: “a public body referred to for a request for access
to information is held to follow up such request in a minimum delay of 30 days
from the date of receipt of the request. The requests emanating from researchers
and professional journalists are handled in a delay period of 15 days”. However,
Article 13 anticipates that a contacted public body may renew this delay period
once. At the expiry of these delay periods the public body can then give notice
of a prorogation to the applicant, who will then have the right to petition for
an appeal before the Commission. Furthermore, there are cases where no
favourable outcome is guaranteed at the request of private citizens, as explained
by a journalist on the panel, who provided the example of receiving no response
when making an enquiry regarding a case of fraud at the university. To date (22
May 2016), the letter that he addressed to the police has not been followed up.
In a country where the population does not have easy access to the Internet, it
happens that money is paid for example, when it only concerns a request for
simple information at the National Institute for Statistics (INS). Thus, one panellist
pointed out that even when information is accessible, in most cases, it has to be
paid for. Oftentimes, it is difficult to know if the content is true or not.
Panellists agreed that there exists a challenge for better, more effective
popularisation of the new law.

Scores:
Individual scores:
1

Country does not meet indicator

2

Country meets only a few aspects of indicator

3

Country meets some aspects of indicator

4

Country meets most aspects of indicator

5

Country meets all aspects of the indicator

Average score:

2.6 (2012 = 2.6, 2009 = 2.3)

AFRICAN MEDIA BAROMETER Côte d’Ivoire 2016

75

Select target paragraph3