Written by: Emma Lewis
“Sorry, your request is denied.”
“This is a business agreement, and therefore confidential.”
“We will have to look at your request and get back to you, but…”
Paradoxically, in this so-called “age of information,” facts, data, even a timeline of events, are not as easy to find as one might expect. One discovers that documents that should be available to the public and online are nevertheless shrouded in mystery. Organizations, institutions, and individuals may feel the urge to keep information close to their chest - sometimes without any real justification for doing so. There is a perception of a general lack of concern, in both public and private sectors, about making information readily available. “Why do you need to know?” they may ask. “What business is it of yours?” And red tape, bureaucracy gets in the way.
One could go so far as to say that a culture of secrecy lingers among post-colonial countries in the Caribbean. The Official Secrets Act remains on the books in a number of Caribbean countries, including the Bahamas, Barbados, Jamaica, and others. This is despite calls from civil society organisations and comments from political leaders over the years that this outdated law should be repealed.
As environmental defenders in the region face a range of challenges, there is an urgent need to highlight this information dilemma. This is where the Escazú Agreement - the first regional environmental treaty in Latin America and the Caribbean - comes in. The agreement (full name: the Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean) was adopted in Escazú, Costa Rica on March 4, 2018. It represents a significant milestone in ensuring the protection of environmental rights and the safety of environmental defenders. Moreover, it is the only binding agreement stemming from the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20); the first regional environmental agreement of Latin America and the Caribbean; and the first in the world containing specific provisions on environmental human rights defenders.
“Access to information is essential for environmental defenders, enabling us to speak out and participate in environmental decisions which affect our lives and livelihoods,”
notes Dr. Theresa Rodriguez-Moodie, Chief Executive Officer at the Jamaica Environment Trust (JET).
As one of the key pillars of the Escazú Agreement, Access to Information is closely linked to its other key goals: public participation and justice. As a foundational principle of Escazú, it empowers the public to be enlightened on important matters affecting their lives, and ensures environmental justice. Without the relevant information, those two pillars would fall down.
The public need to know more about Escazú - for the simple reason that this Agreement is not just another environmental protection agreement. It is about people, the protectors of the environment - how they receive and share information on it, and of course the need to protect the protectors, which is critical especially in Latin America, where lives are often at risk.
A stubborn refusal to provide information - or the subtle, complex ways in which it can be made difficult to obtain - can stop environmental defenders in their tracks. How can they move forward, when they cannot see the full picture? Lack of transparency not only hampers their work, but it impedes any kind of meaningful discourse - with stakeholders, institutions and individuals that an environmental campaigner might wish to engage. Misunderstandings creep in. Communication falters. Rumours spread. And then, in come those evil twins: misinformation (meaning false information spread unintentionally) and disinformation (meaning wrong information, deliberately spread by someone with ill intent). I am sure we are familiar with these two, especially on social media. We already know that this distortion of facts and information can cause tremendous harm in society. It can certainly affect environmental defenders in many ways, heightening prejudice and misrepresentation of their important work.
So, what is the answer? Well-crafted legislation (not all countries in the region have it, but some are currently looking at it) is always a good first step. The Caribbean is making some progress in this respect. However in the case of Jamaica, there is a need for a closer look at the current Access to Information Act, JET’s CEO believes. Dr. Rodriguez-Moodie points out:
“Jamaica’s Access to Information Act of 2002 is in need of review and revision, so it's more important than ever to ensure this right supports transparency and effective advocacy.”
Human rights advocate Susan Goffe stresses:
“Fundamental to the whole Access to Information (ATI) system is that the information held by the government belongs to the people. There is so much of it that should be routinely and proactively published, posted, and released, doing away with the need to make ATI requests for such information - for example, in the public health sector.”
Goffe considers the ATI Act of 2002 to be “one of the most important pieces of legislation passed in Jamaica in the past quarter century...with all its flaws and the problems with implementation.”
The Jamaican legislation is currently under review, following a 2011 report by a parliamentary committee; but it is taking a long time, and Goffe has concerns that it should not be weakened in any way. She adds:
“One of the longstanding problems has been the length of time it often takes to get responses and actual information. Some agencies and ministries have a good record and others are notoriously poor in their response. The response needs to be uniformly good across the government.”
As infrastructural developments, especially on our Caribbean islands’ fragile coastlines, continue apace, access to information is a considerable challenge when it involves private sector developers. During the “Save Goat Islands” campaign in Jamaica, led by JET and supported by many local and international environmental organisations, there was a dearth of information available from both government and the proposed developers, China Harbour Engineering Corporation, as related documents were a private “business agreement.”
In Grenada, environmental defenders have come up against major challenges; in October, the Coral Cove group won a court case, challenging the Planning & Development Authority’s decision to deny public access to planning application information, including the application plans and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) reports. In the case of the high-rise Pinnacle development in Montego Bay, situated on the edge of a protected wetlands area, no EIA was done at all, and it is going ahead, regardless.
So, there are issues with existing legislation. Quite frequently, environmental defenders are forced to take legal action - costly and time-consuming - as a last resort. There is the strangling bureaucracy that hampers environmental defenders’ quest for information. However, there is also this overarching and urgent need: in this information age, the Caribbean needs to move from a culture of secrecy to one of openness and transparency.
In other words, we need to step from the shadows into the light. The Escazú Agreement should be an important tool in making this process, slow as it may be, a reality.
The Escazú Agreement entered into force on April 22, 2021. Out of 24 regional countries that have signed, only three Caribbean countries have not yet ratified it: Dominican Republic, Haiti, and Jamaica. These countries should recognize that it is in their best interests, and those of their people, to do so.
As Indian activist Aruna Roy says: “The right to know is the right to live.”
About the Writer: Emma Lewis currently serves as Board Member of the Natural History Museum of Jamaica and is a member of the Caribbean Climate Justice Alliance (CCJA). She is an Executive Member of BirdLife Jamaica and serves on the Media Working Group of BirdsCaribbean. Keep up with Emma through https://petchary.wordpress.com/ and https://globalvoices.org/author/emma-lewis/
Here is my Guyana experience, extracted from https://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2024/09/30/access-to-information/:
The Organisation of American States (OAS) urged the Guyana government, and an Access to Information Act was passed in 2011. For a while this effort pleased the OAS and Guyana had a good rating. However, the Act is a contortion of words and nice sounding phrases that was really designed to strangle access to information. Here is its declared purpose:
“AN ACT to provide for setting out a practical regime of right to information for persons to secure access to information under the control of public authorities in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of the Government and public authorities and for the appointment of the Commissioner of Information.”