In calling for an international conference on freedom of information, the United Nations General Assembly declared during its first session on 14 December 1946 that "Freedom of information is a fundamental human right and is the touchstone of all freedoms to which the United Nations is consecrated." [Resolution 59 (1)].1 Freedom of information subsequently became a constitutional right in many countries of the world, and has been translated into laws that guarantee the right of the journalists and citizens to access information.
There is a noticeable increase in the number of the countries with legislations that guarantee access to information. A 2009 survey shows ninety countries around the world have these laws, generally known as the "Freedom of Information Act" or [FOIA].2
In West Asia, Jordan was the first country to enact a freedom of information law on 17 June 2007 (Law of Access to Information No. 47/2007). However, the implementation of the law has not been satisfactory. Despite the lapse of more than three years, the law has not yet been properly disseminated. Government departments have not been adequately informed of the requirements of the law. Civil society organizations have to help explain the law, promote its use, and facilitate the flow of information to journalists and citizens.
The Yemeni legislature started to deliberate on a draft law on freedom of information in 2008. The Yemeni draft law has provisions compatible to some extent with the international criteria and best practices. Article 2 of the proposed law lists the offices that should provide access to information. The list includes a range of state institutions (covering legislative, executive and judicial bodies), other government offices, and non- government al organizations receiving public funds in whole or in part. The head of the proposed government office that would implement the law (National Center of Information) has the power to include more institutions in the list if necessary. Freedom of information watchdog Article 19 commented on this provision:3
Although this seems to encompass a broad range of bodies within the scope of the draft Law, the draft Law should focus on the function performed by the body, rather than its formal designation. To this end, it should include all branches and levels of government, including local government, elected bodies, bodies which operate under a statutory mandate, nationalised industries and public corporations, non-departmental bodies or quangos4 and judicial bodies, as well as private bodies carrying out public functions. In other words, if the function performed is a public one, the body should be included within the scope of the draft Law to ensure uniform coverage over all bodies that perform public functions.
Article 3 states that the purpose of the draft law is to “ensure and facilitate the citizen’s right to have access to information,” while Article 4 states that “[access to information is one of] the citizen’s fundamental rights and citizens and foreigners are entitled to exercise such a right within the limits of the law.”
Though many believe that the draft law still needs work in order to make it fully subscribe to international standards, it is important to emphasize that those supporting the draft law in Yemen are heading towards the right direction. The enactment of this law would make Yemen the second Arab country in West Asia to have such law.
Among the Gulf countries, the existing press and publications laws in the six countries (United Arab Emirates, The Kingdom of Bahrain, The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, The Sultanate of Oman, Qatar, and Kuwait, all member- states of the Gulf Cooperation Council or GCC) have no clear or direct reference to the right to information.
The Kingdom of Bahrain is expected to be the first state among the six member-states of the GCC to enact a freedom of information law. The Foreign Affairs, Defense and Security Committee at the Shura Council (legislature) of the kingdom has already discussed the draft freedom of information law. However, with the current political turmoil in the country, the enactment of the law may not happen within 2011.
The extent of freedom of access and circulation of information that exist in a country can be measured according to a number of indicators such as the existence/non-existence of: laws on right to Freedom of Information; laws that refer to people’s right to information; adequate flow of information from top to bottom in government departments and publicly-funded institutions; and finally, provision of information to all who make requests (and not dependent on knowing someone in the office concerned or on the status of the person requesting for information). Using these indicators, Arab States in West Asia have been ranked accordingly in 2010, as Table 1 shows.
Jordan is ranked first among the Arab countries in West Asia in terms of freedom of access and circulation of information for the primary reason perhaps of the existence of a law guaranteeing the right to information. There is also another reason for this top ranking: existence of various domestic and foreign human rights and civil society groups that try to hold the government and themselves accountable to such a law, that pressure the government to facilitate adequate circulation of information, and that also pressure the government to allow media access to such information.
| Rank | State |
| 1 | Jordan |
| 2 | Yemen |
| 3 | Bahrain |
| 4 | Palestine |
| 5 | Iraq |
| 6 | Lebanon |
| 7 | Kuwait |
| 8 | Qatar |
| 9 | United Arab Emirates |
| 10 | Saudi Arabia |
| 11 | Syria |
Yemen and Bahrain, both in the process of enacting their respective freedom of information laws, follow Jordan. Palestine, Iraq and Lebanon come next, while at the bottom of the list are Saudi Arabia and Syria.
Saudi Arabia’s low rank in freedom of information is explained by what many in the international community consider as the existence of a strict and ultra-conservative police state that has full control over media broadcasts and on what government activities could be shown in public. Journalists and human rights organizations face difficulties in finding answers to questions such as: Who are suffering from injustice? Why are they detained, and where are they now?
Syria, like Saudi Arabia, punishes those who broadcast or actively search for information that sheds negative light on the government. This is a consequence of the declaration of state of emergency, even though there is no legitimate emergency within Syria, that has remained effective for almost fifty years. It gives the military and the police the power to arrest anyone at anytime and as many times as they like without any judicial intervention. Many opposition members and human rights activists have been arrested and intimidated over the years due to the state of emergency. The Amman Center for Human Rights Studies (ACHRS) agrees with Amnesty International that it is “unacceptable that authorities [n Syria] continue to use the national state of emergency to suppress dissenting voices”.5 One of the most notable prisoners until recently was a 79-year old human rights lawyer (Haythem al-Maleh), who was only released due to his “old age.” Amnesty International reported that Haythem al-Maleh was “serving a three-year sentence after being convicted by a military court in July 2010 of “conveying within Syria false news that could debilitate the morale of the nation” and “weakening national sentiment.””6 Military court convictions, such as that of Haythem al-Maleh, prevent human rights defenders from exercising their right to access and relay to the public any information on human rights issues. This completely violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and its guarantee of the freedom of access to information as stated in Article 19: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” Additionally, this situation creates a society where corruption and injustice run unimpeded.
Freedom of information has to confront a number of political, social and other constraints existing in the Arab society. Access to and circulation of information that expose Arab political leaders, and also prominent families, may lead to public unrest or violence caused either by the leaders (or prominent families) as retaliation or by the general public as an expression of dissatisfaction with the misuse of power by the leaders. In either case, the parties involved would suffer devastating results, including crippled economy (as in the recent case of Egypt). National leaders would normally not want to take the risk of losing power due to freedom of information.
In the Arab society, where individual and family reputations are given high importance, exposure of corrupt practices within the government, business and other pursuits is equivalent to shaming the individual involved as well as his/her family. Thus people would not attempt to publicly disclose the corrupt activities of colleagues, in order not to shame them and their respective families and be held responsible for it. Such public disclosure can turn into a conflict between families, the family of the individual whose bad practice is exposed retaliating against the family of the person who makes the public disclosure. To avoid this situation, many issues are settled “under the table” or “behind closed doors” so that no one gets shamed or hurt.
There is also a notion in the Arab society that information should be available only to those who have influence, wealth, or power. Ordinary people, on the other hand, are supposedly incapable of accurately analyzing such information. With such view of the people, the statement “Egypt is not ready for democracy” from Egyptian Vice President Omar Suleiman is not surprising at all.
Economics is also a factor against freedom of information in the Arab world. Political and business leaders stand to lose financially by making information available. With public protests coming at the heels of exposure of bad practices, foreign investments are threatened. As in the case of Egypt, public disclosure of violations of human rights means cut in financial support from the United States. Restrictions on the freedom of the press foster an environment for corruption and injustice at all levels of society.
Information is the cornerstone for the exercise of the freedom of opinion, freedom of expression, and the freedom of the press. These three freedoms cannot be exercised without the right to information, which translates into governments allowing journalists to access information on governmental programs and projects, refraining from imposing restrictions on the flow of information to the citizens; not imposing measures that make access to information difficult. ACHRS believes that the right to information is the criterion for measuring all the other rights and liberties. This right is parallel to democratic choice. The freedom of the press necessarily requires ability by individuals to search for facts and to publish information without obstruction of any kind.
ACHRS affirms that the culture of secrecy that prevails in the Arab countries and the laws that reinforce and strengthen this culture (such as emergency laws, laws on state secrets, laws regulating civil service) contradict the principle of transparency. This situation consequently bars the disclosure of mistakes, promotes corruption, and precludes good governance (which includes accountability).
ACHRS strongly recommends the reinforcement of the right to information in the Arab countries of West Asia together with the elimination of obstacles to exercising this right. In this regard, the following are recommended:
1. Emergency laws and martial rule in the Arab states where these laws are still enforced should be repealed/lifted
2. The right to information being part of t he Constitutions should be respected
3. A special law on the right to information should be enacted in those countries where such law does not yet exist
4. Arab countries in West Asia should accede to the international human rights instruments, particularly the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
5. Laws regulating freedom of the press, particularly the laws on the protection of the secrets and documents of the state, should be made compatible with Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
6. Seminars and workshops for government officials to facilitate the flow of information from government institutions to the media and enhance the culture of openness and transparency should be held
7. Seminars and workshops for journalists and media workers on the right to information and its relationship with the freedom of the press (along with the promotion of professionalism among members of the press) should also be held
8. The culture of openness and transparency in society and the personal culture of exercising the right to information and to disseminate this information should be promoted
9. Government control over the media, whether supported by law or not, should stop and the law as the case maybe should be repealed
10. The civil society in the Arab countries of West Asia should sponsor local and Arab initiatives, such as alliances and networks that exert pressure for the consolidation of the right to information and the dissemination of its culture.
For further information please contact: Amman Center for Human Rights Studies, Al Abdali, Al Sharaf Building 4th Floor, P.O. Box 212524, Amman 11121, Jordan; ph (962 6) 46 55 043; fax (962 6) 46 55 043; e-mail: maysoon@achrs.org, ir@achrs.org; www.achrs.org
* This report was prepared by a team of researchers of ACHRS composed of Anwar al-Khatib, Salem Qubailat, a. Muhammad Yaqoub, Magdy Helmy, Naji Alkhchnawi, and Aaron Williams. Mr. Yahya Shqair supervised the team.
1. Resolutions Adopted by the General Assembly During Its First Session (January 1946 – May 1947) http://www.un.org/ documents/ga/res/1/ares1.htm
2. Roger Vleugels, “Overview of all 90 FOIA countries & territories,” Fringe Special, 7 September 2009, available at the Freedom of Information Advocates Network (FOIAnet) website: www.foiadvocates.net/en/ resources.
3. Article 19, Memorandum on the Draft Information Law of Yemen, May 2009 (www.article19.org/ pdfs/analysis/yemen- memorandum-on-freedom-of- information-draft-law.pdf), page
4. A quango is an acronym for quasi-autonomous non-governmental organization. See Nigel Morris, "One by one, the quangos are abolished. But at what cost?," The Independent, 27 July 2010, in www.independent.co.uk/news/ uk/politics/one-by-one-the-quangos-are-abolished-but-at-what-cost-2036175.html.
5. Amnesty International, Syria must release all prisoners of conscience after human rights lawyer freed, 8 March 2011, http://www.amnesty.org/en/ news-and-updates/syria-must-release-all-prisoners-conscience-after-human-rights-awyer-freed-2011-03
6. Ibid.