The citizens’ right to information

Jul 04, 2017 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Kaieteur News has never claimed that it is entitled to advertisements from anyone. Kaieteur News is a national newspaper; it has the largest readership of all newspapers in the country. The denial of advertisements to Kaieteur News, particularly those ads relating to public education on electoral matters including registration, constitutes a denial of information to its readership.
The issue in relation to the non-placement of ads is about the rights of citizens to information. It is not about Kaieteur News needing the revenues from ads.
Freedom of expression presupposes that people have a right to both receive and express their views. Therefore when ads are going to be denied to a newspaper this deprives the readership of the information provided in those ads. This constitutes an attack on freedom of expression
GECOM is not a commercial entity. It does not sell anything. It is there to ensure that citizens can exercise their democratic rights at regular free and fair elections. If, however, those citizens are deprived of information which would give them a full understanding of the electoral system and processes, then the people are being deprived of effective participation in elections.
This constitutes an attack on the right of citizens to elect the government of their choice since the citizens are being denied information important to them exercising their franchise.
The public is also being denied information about the workings of GECOM since advertisements, even for tenders, constitute a form of public transparency about the workings of the elections commission. The public from such information can determine how well GECOM is being managed, a matter of no small significance. When the readership of the largest newspaper in Guyana does not have access to information about what GECOM is purchasing, then the readership is being deprived of information to which they are entitled as citizens.
All citizens are entitled to information about agencies which provide a public service or function. The members of the public are entitled to know what is taking place within these agencies, including their procurement requirements. The public has an interest in knowing whether GECOM ever procured outdated radio equipment. It has an interest in knowing these things because it is public funds which are being used and because such information can enlighten the public about the quality of the service which is likely to be provided by GECOM. The denial of GECOM ads to Kaieteur News therefore constitutes an assault on freedom of expression and a denial of democratic participation. No election can be deemed to be fair in Guyana when these rights are being assailed.
GECOM is not a government entity. It is a state entity which is independently administered by an Elections Commission which for the entirety of this year has been crippled because of the shenanigans which are taking place over the selection of a Chairperson of the Commission.
The failure to appoint the Chairman means that the Commission cannot meet and that all power within GECOM is now in the hands of the management.
It is therefore for the management of GECOM to explain its actions in relation to the non- placement of advertisements in Kaieteur News. GECOM must explain why it has taken this step. Its failure to do so should lead to the new Commission whenever it is constituted making a decision on that management.
GECOM is not run by the government but it uses government monies. The government has an interest as trustees of the public purse, to ensure that taxpayers’ funds are not abused. The government cannot use the concept of administrative neutrality to continue to finance, from public taxes, the advertisements of GECOM when there is a contention that these ads are being placed in a discriminatory manner.
The issue has a bearing on the democratic process. Elections held every five years and which are free and fair are the norm in a democratic society. Democracy does not exist where free and fair elections are not held regularly and in accordance with the laws of the country.
The management of Guyana’s election machinery is in the hands of GECOM. If that management cannot be fair in terms of a simple matter like the placement of ads on matters of public education and edification, can one expect that the conduct of elections will be free and fair? In other words, unless the public can have confidence that the country’s election machinery is in the hands of persons of integrity and fairness, then public confidence in elections will suffer.
The management of GECOM must be made to answer as to why it has opted to disenfranchise a large section of the public – the readership of Kaieteur News – from information which would be of value to them exercising their franchise and about providing knowledge about the inner workings of GECOM.

---

---