Download the full report here.

In 2012, the Open Democracy Advice Centre (ODAC) began exploring the possibility of an automated online requesting
process for the Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000 (PAIA) in South Africa. Adapting the MySociety
technology “Alaveteli”, we pursued the implementation of a solution, but struggled to find any comprehensive reviews
that could provide insight into user experiences of PAIA. To address this, we have undertaken a comprehensive
review of PAIA users and non-users, and in so doing gained invaluable insight into South Africa’s access to information
environment

Access to information is not a reality for most South African citizens. PAIA — the law created to help realise our constitutional right of access to information — is poorly implemented and under-utilised. In 2012, the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) reported that fewer than 15% of audited institutions had specifically budgeted for PAIA implementation and compliance requirements since 2008. This patent reflection of the lack of institutionalisation of the law within government departments was the context in which ODAC first considered automating the process for requesting information (the project was initiated in 2013). That lack of prioritisation is reflected in the state’s subsequent performance in relation to PAIA: in the 2012 reporting period, the PAIA Civil Society Network (of which ODAC is an active member) noted that only 16% of requests resulted in the release of requested information, and more disturbingly, 54% of requests simply remained unanswered.

An Infographic Summary of our Research for Download

The Open Government Partnership (OGP) is a global effort for improving governance. It is a multilateral initiative that aims to secure concrete commitments from governments to promote transparency, empower citizens, fight corruption, and harness new technologies to strengthen governance. In the spirit of multi-stakeholder collaboration, OGP is overseen by a steering committee of governments and civil society organisations. You can visit their website, with access to all the main resources, here.

The Open Democracy Advice Centre have been involved in the Open Government Partnership since mid 2011. Our Executive Director, Mukelani Dimba, is a member of the OGP Steering Committee. You can see some our older content and monitoring activities located here.

The South African government is a founding member of the OGP, and has already submitted two action plans. South Africa took the role of Support Chair on the Open Government Partnership Steering Committee in October 2014. This will then be followed by South Africa resuming the Lead Chair in October 2015. 

---

A review of Reviews: Comparing the OGP, UPRM, APRM and OECDA

The Open Government Partnership (OGP)[1] was developed with a specific goal in mind: advancing transparency and accountability through open government. Since its inception in 2011, its structure has been developed within that specific agenda, as a unique response to a global accountability crisis. As a review mechanism, it is unique in its strong focus on the development agenda of open government, though other review mechanisms exist to forward different aims from different agencies and regions. If the OGP is to be successful, however, it needs to be effectively implemented into a pre-configured context; and thus we have to determine how it can be harmonized with other review instruments of import. As a first step toward this, this unique body of research explores the intersections, harmonies and (potential) inconsistencies with three other review mechanisms: the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), the Universal Periodic Review Mechanism (UPRM), and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Anti-Bribery Convention Review (OECDA).

Through this research, a framework is developed that can assist national investigations into effective methods for implementation of the OGP in different country contexts.

The research reveals that one of the most significant advancements of the OGP is that, from the start, the measures and indicators for success are already contextually particular. The OGP, while ambitious, is also focused and specific, and it has significant potential for effective implementation and harmonisation within the context of current review mechanisms.

Download the report here.

Summary Table of Findings

	OGP	APRM	UPR	OECDA
Year Established	2011	2003	2007 (first cycle 2008)	1997
Reporting Cycle	Two and a half years between action plans (anticipated).	Five years between reviews (anticipated).	Every 4 and a half years (anticipated).	Ongoing. Phase 3 reports occur four times a year.
Institutional Home/Leadership	International Multi (sectoral / stakeholder) Steering Committee.	New Partnership for Africa's Development.	United Nations Human Rights Council.	OECD Working Group on Bribery in International Business Transactions.
Organisational Structure	The OGP is led by the Steering Committee made up of up to 20 government and non-government members. Administrative and technical support is provided by the OGP Support Unit.	The APR Forum for Participating Heads of State and Government; the APR Panel of Eminent Persons; The APRM Secretariat and the Committee of Focal Points.	The UPR Working Group, made up of 47 representatives of UN member states, with support of the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights.	OECD Working Group, with the support of the OECD Secretariat.
National Lead Agency	OGP Representative and National Multi-Stakeholder Forum.	National APRM Focal Point (usually a Minister); National Governing Council (or National Commission); National APRM Secretariat (operational support) and Technical Research Institutes (TRIs).	UPR Representative as a Senior Government Official.	OECDA Representative as Senior Government Official.
Source Principles	Open Government Declaration: Open government and transparency.	NEPAD Document: Development and governance.	The Universal Declaration on Human Rights: The universality, interdependence, indivisibility and interrelatedness of all human rights.	OECD Convention Article on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions: Fostering growth, economic stability and societal well-being.
Qualifying Criteria	Voluntary, with qualifying criteria (minimum eligibility) and Signatory.	Voluntary, and Signatory.	Automatic for all Member States.	Invitation, and Signatory to OECD Convention.
Countries Currently Covered/Participating	65 countries participating. As of November 2014, 93 countries are eligible to join OGP.	By March 2015, 35 of African Union's 54 member states had acceded to the APRM.	All 193 UN Member States.	34 EU Member and 7 Non-member States (including South Africa).
Scope of Review/Thematic Areas	"Open Government" with a focus on Transparency; Accountability; Participation; Technology & Innovation.	"Social Development" measured across four main thematic areas: Democracy and Political Governance, Economic Governance and Management, Corporate Governance, Socio-Economic. Both government and other stakeholders are reviewed.	"Universal Human Rights" records of member states, including consideration of inter alia freedom of the press; freedom of religion and belief; freedom of expression; freedom of movement; freedom of association and peaceful assembly; extra-judicial executions; environment; enforced disappearances; elections; general economic, social and cultural rights; disabilities; development; detention; death penalty; counter-terrorism; corruption, civil society; general civil and political rights; and asylum seekers and refugees.	"Foreign Bribery".
Development of Indicators/Data Sources	Self-determined in collaboration with civil society.	Quantitative and qualitative indicators; very broad but pre-determined.	Based on dialogue between Member States, then assessing implementation of 'Recommendations'.	Initially established by the Working Group, then based on the 'Recommendations' resulting from the review in early phases.
Review Mechanism (main structure)	Self and Independent Review Mechanism.	Self, Independent (Country Review Mission) and Peer (APR Forum).	Self and Peer Review (Troika).	Self and Peer (Pair; can be expert consultants).
Process Outline	Five Stages. Stage 1: Eligibility met and Letter of Intent accepted; Stage 2: State and civil society develop National Action Plan; Stage 3: A full year of implementation follows; Stage 4: Independent and self review assessments completed; Stage 5: New Action Plan developed. Next Review Begins.	Five Stages. Stage 1: Accession to MoU and establishment of structures; Stage 2: Country Review Mission and Draft Report; Stage 3 Country Reviews and Comments; Stage 4: Final Report discussed in APR Forum; Stage 5: Report and National Programme of Action tabled. Next Review Begins.	Three Stages. Stage 1: The Preparatory Phase: Current situation assessed and Recommendations noted; Stage 2: Troika conducts Review and Review adopted; Stage 3: Recommendations implemented. Next Review Begins (with acknowledgement of first review's implementation).	Three Phases Phase 1: Evaluate legal instruments against Convention; Phase 2 Review of enforcement and implementation, Phase 3: Follow up on recommendations and adjustments made under Phase 2.
Reporting Details	OGP Steering Committee adopts both country-prepared self assessment, as well as independently prepared IRM report.	African Peer Review Forum adopts final Country Review Report. This is adopted alongside minutes of debate, as well as the state-created National Programme of Action.	State prepares National Report. All outcome reports adopted by Working Group.	Working Groups adopts Phase 1, 2 and 3 reports. State assessments incorporated into those reports.
Sanction	Soft sanction and Eligibility Complaints Process.	Soft sanction: Recommendations and dialogue.	Soft sanction; but "consistent non-cooperation" can be addressed by the Human Rights Council.	Soft sanction: Dialogue and delegations.
Citizen Participation	Significant: Civil Society forms part of the formal structures of the OGP, and is consulted during every phase of the review.	Limited: The National Governing Council is multi-stakeholder and thus civil society is engaged in the development of the National Programme of Action, but there is little guidance.	Limited: Civil society may make contributions to the National Report and might be consulted during review. They are permitted to witness the Working Group session on the outcomes report.	Severely limited: Consultation with civil society as stakeholders possible during Phase 2 and 3.

 

Launching our OGP Monitoring Project

30 August 2012

ODAC has launched our OGP Monitoring Website. Though our involvement in the process began in 2011, and we have been gathering indicators for some time, we have finally conglomerated it onto a wordpress website to make the process open and available to the general public. You can visit the site at http://opengovernmentafrica.wordpress.com.

It is worth noting in particular that anybody who wishes to makes comments on the access to information environment in South Africa, whether positive or negative, and wishes to describe the types of information they need from government can do so through the site here.

We will use all the information gathered to create regular report cards on the OGP process.

Launching the SA Civil Society OGP website and our 2012 review of transparency

19 April 2012

As a result of discussions at the OGP Civil Society Meeting of 03 April, ODAC has collated and release a description of the transparency environment in South Africa. Highlight several key features of the transparency environemnt, the document draws on feedback from civil society and some key indicators to provide a useful reference point for monitoring the committments made by government to the OGP.

We hope that this will be the starting point of vibrant and proactive engagement between government, civil society and the private sector as we all strive to make open government a reality for the equal benefit of all South African citizens.

Download page for “TRANSPARENCY IN SOUTH AFRICA: a civil society review to facilitate South Africa’s Open Government Partnership Interventions“.

Open Government Partnership Civil Society Meeting

03 April 2012

Today a meeting was hosted at the Open Society Foundation, bringing together civil society memebers of the transparency sector to engage on the South African committments and think strategically about how civil society should move forward.

These discussions were incredibly productive, and it was agreed that as a prelude to the upcoming meeting in Brasilia an outline of the transparency issues in South Africa would be drawn up in order to inform our future engagement.

Open Government Partnership Action Plan for the Republic of South Africa

09 September 2011

In relation to the below ODAC has since received the Department of Public Service and Administration draft country plan which will be submitted to the Presidency.

OGP Action Plan 09 September 2011 by the DPSA

ODAC calls on government to be open about the Open Government Partnership

18 August 2011

The Open Democracy Advice Centre (ODAC) has called on President Jacob Zuma to be open about  South Africa’s participation in the Open Government Partnership (OGP). The Open Government Partnership is a project being championed by the United States President Barack Obama and it seeks to “secure concrete commitments from governments to promote transparency, empower citizens, fight corruption, and harness new technologies to strengthen governance”. South Africa is a member of the steering committee of the OGP yet very little is known about the project in South Africa.

In letter to President Zuma, ODAC has asked the President and the government to fully inform the public about South Africa’s role in the OGP project.  “South Africa is to present its OGP action plan at the official launch of the OGP in New York in September and this action plan has to be developed following extensive public consultation.  We are not aware of any public consultation processes that have been conducted to develop the action plan” Mukelani Dimba, Deputy Executive Director at ODAC. According to Dimba the public not only has a right to know about the OGP but according to the OGP’s own principles, the public must be consulted in development of these commitments and action plans. He said; “What commitments are we as a country making towards advancing openness and accountability in the conduct of public affairs? What action plan will President Zuma be tabling in New York in September? Government must be open about the Open Government Partnership.”

Letter to the President

The PAIA Unit embarks on a campaign to create awareness of the right of access to information nationally, and has noted a need to accelerate compliance on PAIA at provincial and local government levels. The key objectives of ODAC’s advocacy work are to:

• Enhance civil society access to public & private information through the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA).

• Enhance capacity of holders of information to realise effectively the right to access information through the operation of PAIA and PAJA.

• Support effective implementation of the Promotion of Access to Information Act, the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act.

• Support the implementing and monitoring agencies in the performance of their statutory responsibilities under both laws through replication of international best practices and benchmarks.

Project 1:  National Information Officers Forum - The forum creates a platform whereby implementers of PAIA engage and discuss strategies of increasing compliance rates of the Act. As a result of the , ODAC in conjunction with the SAHRC invites Information Officers and Deputy Information Officers on the Right to Know Day (28^TH September) each year to interact with experts and share best practices. The forum has been used as a tool to cultivate a culture of social justice and respect of human rights. At the end of the Forum, the Golden Key Awards ceremony takes place. The ceremony celebrates institutions that have scored well in our Access to Information implementation index research. Provincial Information Officers Forums have also been launched in 2010. The Provincial Forums have been established in KwaZulu-Natal and the North West to identify common challenges affecting the implementation of PAIA. We will be rolling out this project in other provinces. Project 2: Study tour to Sweden Purpose of Study ODAC undertook a study trip for government officials to meet up with their counterparts in Sweden. The trips mission was for the South African delegation to learn about Access to Information and Records Management practices by the Swedish government. Issues discussed included

• Understanding the difference between information meant for release to the public and privately held information.

• The importance of the Freedom of the Press Act (Sweden) in granting information

• How to preserve information and documents.

• The Secrecy Act used by public officials in Sweden to refuse the release of information.

• Protection of classified information and how the appeal process work.

• The principles governing public access to official documents and public restrictions.

• How the County Council( Equivalent of local municipality) shares information that is of concern to the public

The delegation from South Africa:

• Mr. Mashwahle Diphofa – (Director General at the Public Service Communion

• Adv. Ernest Chipu (Chair of the Co-ordinating Committee for the National Information Officers Forum )

• Mrs. Regina Makhuvele – Director of Records Management at the Limpopo Premiers Office

• Ms. Zukiswa Mlandu – Officer at the Office of the President of South Africa

• Adv Mark Serfontein (Deputy Director General at the KZN Premiers Office)

• Prof. Richard Calland (UCT)

• Ms. Alison Tilley – Executive Director of ODAC

• Ms. Gabriella Razzano – South African History Archives

• Mr. Tobela Tapula – Advocacy Officer at ODAC