INTRODUCTION : 

Laws about the right to information (RTI) or freedom of information (FOI) uphold the principle that all data kept by the government and its affiliated organizations should be accessible to the public and should only be withheld for justifiable reasons, such as privacy or security. RTI laws bolster the public's knowledge of their state and encourage accountability and transparency. Establishing a supportive atmosphere that protects and advances the right to information enhances corporate competitiveness, enables more informed involvement in discussions, and increases public awareness of the procedures involved in making decisions. RTI bolsters the rule of law, good governance, and participatory democracy.

Malaysia has experienced rapid growth in the last few years. Within the constrained borders of each state, the Selangor and Penang FOI Enactments aim to acknowledge and protect the fundamental right to information. These state-level laws, however, are nonetheless subject to the federal Official Secrets Act of 1972 (OSA).

The Pakatan Harapan administration (2018–2020) declared that it would revoke the OSA and enact a new law safeguarding the right to information. The Prime Minister's Department's Legal Affairs Division (Bahagian Hal Ehwal Undang-undang, or "BHEUU") is tasked with reviewing the laws that now govern the right to information and researching the viability of a federal RTI Act.

Afghanistan, India, and Sri Lanka are in the top 10 of the world's RTI ratings, which evaluate the quality of each nation's laws about access to information. With a multiethnic population and a comparable colonial past, Sri Lanka serves as a useful example for Malaysia.

The selection was based on shared cultural qualities and the fact that Indonesia, the highest-scoring country in Southeast Asia, came in at number 38 on the RTI ratings. Even though OSA laws have been superseded in both the UK and India, we hope to be able to demonstrate the influence of that tradition by incorporating them into our analysis.

The national RTI laws of each country and their abbreviations are: 

a. Right to Information Act 2016 in Sri Lanka (the “Sri Lankan RTIA”);

b. Public Information Disclosure Act 2008 in Indonesia (the “Indonesian PIDA”);

c. Access to Information Law 2018 in Afghanistan (the “Afghan ATI law”);

d. Right to Information Act 2005 in India (the “Indian RTIA”);

e. Freedom of Information Act 2000 in the United Kingdom (the “UK FOIA”); and 

f. Freedom of Information Act 1982 in Australia under the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth Government (the “Australian FOIA”). 

CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

The right to information must be recognised as a right in the Constitution.

1. The constitutions of Afghanistan, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka all specifically include citizens' rights to knowledge. 

2. The courts in Australia and India have acknowledged that the right to free information is a prerequisite to the right to free speech.

3. The Human Rights Act of 1998, Article 10, provides that in the United Kingdom (a country with an uncodified constitution), the right to freedom of expression encompasses the ability to receive and disseminate ideas and information without interference from public authorities and concerning limits.

SCOPE OF ‘PUBLIC AUTHORITIES’

Generally, RTI laws apply to executive, legislative, judicative agencies, state-owned corporations, and publicly funded organisations.

Sri Lankan RTIA

1. The term "public authority" refers to all governmental branches and levels as well as a wide range of institutional kinds, such as public businesses, for-profit educational institutions, and non-governmental organizations that get significant funding from local or foreign governments.

2. The scope specifically includes businesses where the state or a public corporation owns at least 25% of the shares or a controlling stake, as well as private firms hired to perform public functions (to the extent of activities covered by that public function) (section 43).

3. The laws define public entities broadly and do not specifically exclude any public body from its purview.

4. Unlike other regional RTI laws, such as those in India, the Sri Lankan RTIA also covers security and intelligence agencies.

UK’sFOIA 

1. The UK's FOIA also applies to businesses that are owned by the government. 

2. Nevertheless, those who are delivering public services by contract are not covered by the UK's FOIA. This is because it would be more sensible to limit the coverage to high-value contracts alone, as such an extension might be burdensome and unneeded overall, especially for small enterprises. 

3. Only public authorities operating in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland, as well as UK public authorities operating in Scotland, are covered by the FOIA. Public authorities in Scotland are subject to a different statute (the Freedom of Information (Scotland Act). 

Indonesian

Like Sri Lankan law, Indonesian statutes define public entities broadly and do not specifically exclude any public body from its purview

India 

 1. The regional RTI rules in India do not encompass security and intelligence agencies, in contrast to those in Sri Lanka. 

2. While not covering the same territory, the Indian legal system defines "information" as "any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force" (section 2(f)).

Scope of ‘Information’

According to Article 19 (Human Rights NGO), the scope of the law information includes both information produced by the authority and information obtained by other authorities. In light of this, the following definition of "information" is given:

1. According to Article 1(2) of the Indonesian PIDA, "public information means information in any form that is produced, stored, managed, sent, and/or received by a public agency relating to the functioning of the state and other public authorities”.
2.  According to Section 43 of the Sri Lankan RTIA, "any material which is recorded in any form including records, documents, memos, emails, opinions, advice, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, correspondence, memorandum, draft legislation, book, plan, map, drawing, diagram, pictorial or graphic work, photograph, film, microfilm, sound recording, videotape, machine-readable record, computer records and other documentary material, regardless of its physical form or character and any copy thereof”. 

ACCESSIBILITY AND ASSISTANCE TO APPLICANTS 

India

1. The need to support information seekers is stipulated under the Indian RTIA.
2.  According to Section 5(3), the designated officer's responsibilities include responding to information requests from applicants and making sure that every reasonable aid is given to speed up the procedure.
3. According to section 7(4), one such obligation is to provide requestors with disabilities with special help.
4.  Additionally, several Indian states have set up specialized infrastructure, such as texting features for mobile phone users to follow up on their requests for information from the government or a toll-free phone line for information requests.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      

Australia

The agency to which a request was made must help the applicant complete or amend the request if it does not comply with one of the FOIA's requirements (section 15(3)). 

UK

1. Similar to Australian FOIA Section 20(2), the UK FOIA stipulates that access shall be granted in that form if the applicant has sought access in that particular form (Section 11).
2.  In the UK, this can include information given in a digest or summary form, a permanent form (a hard copy), another form that is acceptable to the applicant (such as an electronic form), or the chance to view a record.
3.  Insofar as it is reasonably practical, public authorities must honour a requestor's preference.

Sri Lanka 

In Sri Lanka, there is a rule that requires the information officer to advise the requester about various format options and the fees associated with them in the context of larger requests. This helps the requester make an informed decision. Equal access to RTI is another important area to take into consideration, especially regarding language or disability barriers.

1. But Sri Lanka still has room for improvement in this area. While the Sri Lankan RTIA permits an applicant to submit an information request (section 24(5)(b)) requesting information in the "language of preference," it does not require a public entity to provide the requested information in that language.
2. 2. Rather, the obligation is to provide the data in the language used to preserve the official records.                                                                                                                                                 As a result, information was provided to Tamil inhabitants in the language of Sri Lanka. In a different instance, a visually impaired person requested information in Braille, but the RTIC was unable to offer it to them.

PROMOTIONAL MEASURES

1. Numerous jurisdictions, including Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, and India, deal with the issue of attacks, intimidation, and harassment directed towards RTI petitioners. Information officials, journalists, and even entire villages have been the targets of attacks.
2.  Furthermore, it has been stated that marginalized communities that try to use the law face difficult challenges due to "persistent practices of state impunity, hostility of officials, delays and obstructions coupled with lack of awareness of RTI in the government sector." Known "delay and deny" strategies are employed by public officials to refuse the RTI force.
3.  Public bodies have been known to respond hostilely to requests for information and to withhold information on the grounds of privacy and secrecy even when it does not come under one of the RTI law's exemptions.
4. Many jurisdictions, notably Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, and India deal with the issue of attacks, intimidation, and harassment of RTI applicants. Targets have included information officers, journalists, and sometimes entire towns. The very poor understanding of the right to information, particularly among rural communities (as observed in India and Afghanistan), is another connected and widespread issue. Public officials' general ignorance of RTI rules is another prominent reason given for negative reactions and inadequate use of the regulations.
5.  It is necessary to set aside funds for marketing campaigns, efficient recordkeeping, and the closure of the appeals procedure. The government should allocate enough funding to its media and information departments so that they may make investments in institutional, social, technical, and physical infrastructures as well as make information more accessible.

Written By: Lakshmi Priya
Supervised by: Adv. Kalyan Khrishna Bandaru