Like a woman’s heart, a deep ocean of secrets, many governments the world over operate on secrets, have perfected the art of censoring journalists and have cushioned soft landing ground to do corruption and other socially unaccepted acts.
WikiLeaks editor Daniel Schmitt’s presentation at the Summer Academy 2010 was nothing but a mind-opener, which I feel is an understatement. (I still cannot find a perfect word to explain this).
The silence in the seminar room was deafening. You could have heard a pin drop. The attentiveness was in my opinion, at its highest since the Summer Academy course commenced. It showed how “thirsty” young journalists are to expose evils done in their countries, by people in power, who abuse their positions. Maybe it is about time they thought of sharpening their skills!
With all ears and eyes on Daniel Schmitt, we leart how WikiLeaks executes its missions. They accept documents that have not been published, to start an investigation into claims of wrong doing. WikiLeaks guarantees that its sources remain anonymous, uncensored and legal. It is a public service which means it is a free service for those who give information and receive information (no costs). WikiLeaks has also cut an edge for themselves. They are a premier supplier for fresh documents thus making investigative journalism more affordable. Most importantly, they have provided a platform for ungagging the media.
After getting the documents, WikiLeaks has to verify through a unique and robust process that the supplied documents are genuine. This is possible since WikiLeaks works with about 1,000 experts around the world. They also pride themselves in the fact that they have never lost a source meaning that none of their sources has either been arrested or killed. Remember earlier on I mentioned that their sources remain anonymous. Only one case of a US citizen who was arrested and, if convicted, faces a sentence of 50 years in jail after sharing with a friend-turned-foe that he leaked important information including a video that WikiLeaks released under the title Collateral Murder. His ‘friend’ betrayed him, leading to his arrest. LESSON LEARNT: If u plan or ever give information to WikiLeaks, keep it a top secret. In Kenya we say, Hakuna siri kati ya watu wawili, (There is no secret between two people).
With the birth of WikiLeaks in 2007, the danger of journalists and reform-oriented whistleblowers alike to lose their lives has become slimmer. Governments and global leaders are now becoming more careful on decisions they make in their posts. As much as the media may feel gagged in some countries, WikiLeaks has provided an avenue to “let off the steam” on these burning issues and it continues to encourage transparency.
The ability by WikiLeaks to protect their sources or rather keep their sources anonymous is a plus to those with-holding important information on scandals that need to be exposed.
I was encouraged by these wise words that: Information that is best kept secret has most potential for reform, so flash out that document that will help expose an ill in society. AND: treating info like an asset does not maximize its impact, so open that can of worms in your country, WikiLeaks has your back.

One could argue, just like Wikileaks editor Daniel Schmitt said that FOIA is irrelevant nowadays considering the failure of some states to “put into practice” the right-to-access-to-information clause of such law. In Tanzania, for example, as mentioned by one of the participants of the Summer Academy, its Constitution provides for freedom of the press and of speech, but its government is depriving its citizens of these rights.

During the discussion, it was also noted that media freedom and access to information–be it a trade or state “secrets”, highly classified or public documents, is always intertwined and inseparable.

Another group also took note of the conflicting provisions of Zimbabwe’s Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, which has denied the public of their rights to information because of the ‘protection of privacy’ clause of the law.

To me, as a working journalist in a free media environment following the restoration of our democracy in 1986 ending the two-decades old Marcos regime, it is much better to have a FOIA than not having it at all to promote the culture of transparency in every bureaucracy.

Though the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides for the right of the people to information on matters of public concern, human rights activists, lawmakers, as well as media organizations have been pushing for the passage of the long overdue Freedom of Information (FOI) bill in the 15th Congress.

Manila’s FOI bill was not enacted in the final session day of the 14th Congress due to lack of quorum in the House of Representatives last June. There were only 128 out of 268 lawmakers who attended the session last June 4.

The Philippines is among the first 14 countries which had its law promoting the freedom of information. Sweden had the oldest Freedom of the Press Act, which was passed in 1766, followed by Colombia in 1888, Finland in 1951 and United States in 1966.

I would like to say that there are persistent calls to pass the law following the corruption controversies hounding the past administration of our former president-turned-Congresswoman Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. The public wants to know more and they deserve to know.

The new administration of President Benigno Simeon “Noynoy” Aquino III already threw its support to the bill, which the public hopes would serve as a powerful tool to empower them.

I can relate with a colleague from Ghana, who is quite frustrated over non-passage of the seven-year old FOIA, as he cited the need of every Ghanian to exercise their right to information. He even lamented that the pervasive illiteracy rate in Ghana overshadowed every Ghanian’s right to information.

During the session, Dr. Manfred Redelfs, who heads the Greenpeace’s research unit and is a lecturer at the University of Hamburg, disclosed that several actors have played crucial roles in pushing or lobbying for a FOIA. He even noted a particular state is pressed on passing such a law because this is among the conditions set by some world financial institutions, including the World Bank.

He also pointed out that youth of a particular state which is still aiming for a FOIA could contribute and bring in changes in a  country which deprives its citizens of their rights to information. This could be applied to the current situation in Vietnam where media censorship is high. The young people’s access to information through internet as well as exposure to other cultures could introduce reforms in their restricted society.

Contrary to Wikileaks editor Schmitt’s claim that FOIAs seem to be useless, Dr. Redelfs believes that there is something to hope for when a nation has its own FOIA.

The FOIA proves to be effective in stirring the wheel of public debate in developed countries, including US and Germany as well as some Asian countries, including Thailand.

If not for the FOIA, daily calendars of top state or local officials showing their working habits, including that of President George W. Bush would not have been disclosed in US and Germany. If not for the FOIA, the names of detainees at the Guantanamo prison would not have been released. If not for the FOIA, the admission system in public schools in Thailand would not have been changed. If not for the FOIA, the people would not have been informed that the airline Lufthansa and other companies such as Philip Morris Holland B.V. have been collecting agricultural export subsidies from the European Union.

Transparency and accountability should remain as main principles in a democratic society and these will only be achieved if the public is not deprived of their right to information. A well-informed public will always be an asset of a democratic society.

Today SLAJ received a complaint from journalist Kadijatu Savage (Mrs) accompanied by an audio CD containing a voice believed to be that of Madam Unekwe in which she insults the journalist calling her “a thief, a cheap slot and a bastard”. In the audio, she also makes cat calls at the journalist and keeps deriding her throughout the conversation once the journalist has introduced herself as a journalist.

The journalist’s offence was simply because she telephoned Madam Unekwe to cross-check a piece of information concerning her alleged treatment of staff at her bank and her ostentatious lifestyle.

“This is a shockingly rude behaviour by someone who should set the best of standards,” says Umaru Fofana, president of SLAJ. “Such an action by such a woman is nothing less than utter disregard for civility, decency, her bank’s shareholders and customers for which she must be punished,” he goes on.

Subsequent utterances by the Zenith Bank Managing Director has the proclivity of undermining the good bilateral relations between her country Nigeria and Sierra Leone especially when she insulted the latter, its leaders and its citizens. We wish to call for her immediate recall by her bank especially when she has shown utter contempt for her action since it happened on 23 July. “By her actions, Madam Unekwe’s position has now become untenable and if she is not recalled by her employers in the next one week, we will have no regrets in calling for all Sierra Leoneans banking with Zenith Bank to close their accounts with them”, Fofana concludes.