Freedom of Information Act can guarantee a lot

Jan 09, 2011 News

---

By Michael Benjamin

Life is replete with contradictions yet these very contradictions make life interesting and some may even say, meaningful.
During adolescence I had developed a penchant for poking my nose into other people’s business. I believe that no man is an island and that everything someone does can have either a negative or positive impact on the lives of others.
Even the most selfish among us will find it extremely difficult extending such attitudes to every sphere of life. My neighbour might be selfish but he/she would find it extremely difficult to enjoy his/her collection of Beethoven music while depriving me of similar pleasures.
One may argue that the selfish neighbour could purchase a headphone and attach it to the stereo set thus shutting out the sounds from my ears. While this argument may be valid I am still contending that the selfish neighbour would be required to give up a considerable portion of pleasure in order to deny fellow neighbours a portion of the aforementioned pleasures.
This phenomenon, if you may, is referred to as an externality. In the same vein, a person may be law abiding but can be stained or condemned in the public court simply because of the area in which he/she lives.
It was not so long ago that Buxtonians were unfortunately stereotyped; when gunmen had infiltrated their community, holding the nation under siege. I was told that residents of that East Coast Demerara village refused to use their addresses when applying for jobs since such disclosures minimized their chances of procuring the job, notwithstanding the fact that the applicants were qualified for the job in question. These residents were the victims of externalities beyond their control.
I started this article with a disclosure of a penchant inculcated during adolescence of poking my nose in other people’s business. In those days persons with such proclivities were dubbed ‘Cachars.’
A little later, as I reached puberty, the term evolved into ‘Cochore.’ Today, that very term has done a 360 degrees and it is now referred to as journalism. Really, if anyone had told me that poking my nose into my neighbours’ business or taking an avid interest in the affairs of my best friend was really ‘on the ground’ practice for my career choice I would have scoffed at the notion.
Yet the experience I gained during such childhood activity is now standing me in good stead.
A tenderfoot once chided me that anyone could be a journalist. All one needed was a pen or a microphone and a medium to disseminate the gathered information. I grew up on a healthy diet of this hogwash until I sat in my first class at the University of Guyana under the tutelage of Karen Davis.
I learnt of journalistic ethics and journalistic prudence among some of the principles of the trade. During one of our tutorials Ms Davis posed a question for discussion; “if you are a journalist and you receive confidential information from a source under a commitment to retain that secrecy and should you be placed before the courts to testify and divulge that information, would you elect to spill the beans on your source or choose incarceration?”
This was indeed a ticklish one that elicited varied answers. In the end, most of the students said that they would retain their secrecy irrespective of the punishment.
Journalism is the fourth estate and one is automatically committed to certain statutes when he/she decides to enter into the practice.
Journalists worldwide have employed investigative strategies and uncovered numerous illicit practices that changed the course of history. The Watergate Scandal and the issue with former Washington Mayor, Marion Barry, readily come to mind.
Yet amidst such important contributions journalists worldwide have been killed in some instances, incarcerated in others and scoffed at and ridiculed.
In Colombia, replete with drug lords, journalists that have been too investigative for their own good have been disposed of by retaliating cartels. In Cuba, Fidel Castro has been harsh on dissidents and has manipulated the law to discourage these very journalists by holding the sword of Damascus over their heads, incarcerating them for frivolous offences while in the line of duty.
There have also been accusations leveled at Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez of instituting draconian policies to implement a gag ban on journalists. Luckily in Guyana, except for the scathing remarks directed by members of the officialdom and a few spiteful and malicious acts, journalists are allowed certain freedoms and liberties that allow them to gather the news and place it in the public domain.
Notwithstanding this, it is indeed a pity that despite the presence of such tolerance our legislators have shied away from enacting the freedom of information act. This document offers protection to all stakeholders and most importantly closes the floodgates for yellow journalism while creating the environment for accountability of all stakeholders while creating an atmosphere of checks and balances.
This has not always been the case; one can cast their mind to the dark days of stifled speech; when even members of the press spoke in guarded tones. If the truth be told, the present atmosphere no longer presents such a foreboding.
A little cussing out over here and a few disparaging remarks over there, by politicians and other important folks, even though unacceptable, can be ignored since the journalistic community can now boast of some amount of immunity.
However, the acceptance of standards that fall below the requirements of the profession could be a dangerous precedent that emits the wrong signals. We are now into an election year; what many citizens refer to as the mad season or the season of madness.
We could simply expect the citizenry to behave in accordance with social norms and expectations. However, it is always preferable to enact laws and statutes that demand acceptable behaviours. It is for this very reason that the bill to implement the Freedom of Information act should be placed before legislators for debate and discussion.
Otherwise, no one must complain when chaos reigns during the elections process.

---

---