People’s right to know
By Zahid Abdullah
THE world celebrates Sept 28 as International Right to Know Day and the decision to mark this day was taken on this very day at an international meeting of right-to-information activists in Sofia, Bulgaria, in 2002. They proposed that the date be dedicated to the promotion of access to information worldwide.
Over 80 countries, including Pakistan, have carried out legislations on the freedom of information and many other countries are in the process of enacting laws to facilitate citizens’ access to information.
This year, this day has special significance for Pakistan as we have once again been able to put the derailed process of democracy back on track. The nation can ill-afford this long, drawn-out oscillation between dictatorial regimes and democratic dispensations, an obvious characteristic of our political history. We have had general elections before; the nation has witnessed oath-taking ceremonies of presidents, prime ministers, speakers, chief ministers, ministers, MNAs and MPAs in the past. But it has also seen democratic set-ups overthrown time and again.
How can we put in place a democratic system that has the ability to sustain itself and would not be taken over by a dictatorial juggernaut? In order to answer this question, we need to understand how politicians and some sections of the press have deliberately promoted the self-serving concept of public accountability. Furthermore, we need to understand the concept of public accountability, its linkage with the right to information and as to why the world celebrates the Right to Know Day.
Politicians would like us to believe that people hold them accountable through elections. They have been harping on about this forever and the concept of electoral accountability has now achieved a ‘hallowed’ status. These representatives want a carte blanche from citizens in the intervening period between two general elections. How can we make informed choices about who to elect if we are ignorant about the financial conduct of our politicians when they are in power? After all, we elect them to put our resources to judicious use for our collective benefit. How do we know that our resources are not being squandered?
Politicians conduct media trials of one another by issuing statements of alleged rent-seeking, embezzlement and the misappropriation of public funds. The truth, however, remains elusive as these statements amount to nothing but words. Instead of conducting deeper probes and looking beyond these statements, the media continues to facilitate the blame game, creating a trust deficit for politicians. As a result, no tears are shed when they are sent packing. This has happened in the past and has the potential to happen in the future as well. How can this situation be rectified? This is where a citizen’s right to know comes into play.
The emphasis on electoral accountability needs to be replaced with everyday accountability. This is in the best interest of politicians as a class. Proceedings of the standing committees of parliament need to be made open to journalists and concerned civil society groups who should be invited to participate in these meetings as observers. Some democracies have effective legislation on the freedom of information to ensure daily accountability. Such legislation provides citizens easy, cost-effective and speedy access to information. Our current legislation on this issue came about in the shape of an ordinance in 2002. It was a decision on policy actions agreed on with the Asian Development Bank during negotiations for the loan.
The government, however, is in the process of repealing this weak law. The Freedom of Information Bill 2008 has already been drafted and the government is likely to present it in parliament for discussion. The significance of this law for the media as the fourth pillar of the state can hardly be exaggerated. Apart from providing a framework for proactive disclosure of information, it will provide guidelines to journalists on the submission of information requests in order to have access to official documents.
In other words, they will be able to investigate how true corruption charges actually are with trouble-free access to public documents. This way, they will be able to keep a watchful eye on public representatives and ensure everyday accountability. Therefore, it is extremely important that we have an intense discussion on this law in print and on the electronic media.
No matter which political party has been in power, we have never believed that it is ‘our government’. This has been largely due to the fact that we have not been made to feel a part of a particular regime. We may have meagre resources but we do need to know how these are being managed and spent. This will only happen when there is a free flow of information. If a government is not open, what difference does it make whether it has a general or an elected politician at the helm?
zahid@cpdi-pakistan.org


The iron embrace
By Ed Pilkington
TWO streets, separated from each other by seven and a half miles and several billion dollars, united this week in an iron embrace that will see them either go down together or survive together.
To the east is Wall Street, the stretch of imposing masonry in downtown Manhattan at the centre of the global financial meltdown. To the west, a hop across the Hudson, is Main Street in Newark, New Jersey, a stretch of clapboard houses and corner shops that is already feeling the cold blast of a downturn.
Wall Street was named after the wall built in 1653 to protect the fledgling New Amsterdam settlement against the intrusions of the British. But few remember that now. What began as a defence for the common person was this week cast as the common person’s enemy. At least, that is how the coalition of New York unions were portraying it at a protest rally against the proposed $700bn bail-out. “Wall Street sucks,” the crowd chanted outside the forbidding entrance of the New York Stock Exchange.
Class war had come to Wall Street. As Arthur Cheliotes, president of the union of New York administrative employees, put it: “There’s a lot of anger among our members. Wall Street is handing us the bill for a party they never invited us to.”During their lunch break from the pandemonium of the trading floor, several traders stood listening to the bile that was being directed at them. Gary was bemused by what he heard. “We’re in a total mess, but I don’t see how it’s totally our fault. People keep bringing up CEOs and their huge pay — but they are just a tiny part of what goes on here.”
“They say bail out!” a union rep burst in as he bellowed at the protesters through loud speakers. “We say get the hell out!”
Leonard Bauer, dressed in a standard-issue dark blue suit, said how he and his colleagues from Bank of America were working around the clock on the deal to buy Merrill Lynch.
“It’s pretty messy,” he said. “The way the markets are going you have to work on everybody — this is not a question of us versus them.”
The don’t-blame-us theme was continued by an insurance broker who preferred not to give his name (“I think it’s better not to.”) “Everyone shares the blame. It’s people outside Wall Street who tried to get a house they couldn’t afford and a car they couldn’t afford. Everyone has to take part of the blame and work together to fix this.”
Though it is less than 13km away, Main Street in Newark is another country. The neighbourhood is so surrounded by railway tracks it is called Ironbound, and has a high concentration of Brazilian immigrant residents.
There is none of the austere grandeur of Wall Street here, nor any of its sense of corporate power, and two storeys pass as high-rise. Despite the contrast, it quickly becomes clear that this Main Street, like Main Streets in towns across the United States, is umbilically linked to the financial powerhouse to the east.
The owner of Betel bakery says trade has been down by about a third since the financial crisis on Wall Street began. Nani Silva supplies restaurants throughout New Jersey and New York, and she can put a clear figure on the slump. Before the crash, her customers used to buy $2,000 worth of supplies in a day; now they will spend less than $1,000. “It’s crazy right now,” she says, adding that if it stays like this for much longer she will think of returning to Brazil, which she left four years ago.
Down the street, Marcio Rodgrigues was unaware of the plan for a $700bn bailout until we informed him of it. “Seven hundred billion dollars. Wow!” was his reaction.
He is in the local construction business, and says orders are down by at least half over the past few weeks, partly as a result of a spate of foreclosures that has swept the area as homeowners have become mired in debt.
As we talk, he keeps returning to the figure of $700bn. “That’s a lot of money. They should give that to us, the taxpayers. If they did that, we would spend the money and the depression would be over.”
The massive movement of stocks on Wall Street may seem a world away, but here on Main Street they are making all the difference to the dollars and tips.
— The Guardian, London


