Freedom of Information in Practice | When Sri Lanka passed the Right to Information Act, No. 12 of 2016 (RTI Act), it was hailed as a landmark reform. At the time, Sri Lanka became one of the first countries in South Asia to embed the right of citizens to demand information from public authorities. The promise was clear: greater transparency, stronger accountability, and a shift away from a culture of secrecy that had long characterised the state.
Nearly a decade later, the question remains, has RTI delivered on its promise?
The Legal Framework
The RTI Act grants citizens the right to request information from public authorities. These include ministries, departments, state-owned enterprises, local authorities, universities, and even private bodies performing public functions.
However, like most freedom of information laws, Sri Lanka’s RTI has a set of exemptions. Requests can be denied if the information touches on national security, defence, international relations, trade secrets, medical confidentiality, or matters relating to the Cabinet. These carve-outs are meant to balance transparency with legitimate state and private interests.
The RTI Commission was established as an independent body to monitor compliance, hear appeals, and issue directives. On paper, the Commission has broad powers. In practice, its effectiveness has often been constrained by limited resources and political pressure.
Successes to Date
Despite the hurdles, RTI has delivered notable successes:
- Public finance disclosures: Journalists and civil society groups have used RTI to uncover questionable public spending and procurement deals.
- Environmental transparency: Activists have obtained permits, EIAs (Environmental Impact Assessments), and other documents that would otherwise be hidden.
- Accountability in administration: Citizens have accessed information about public sector recruitment, land allocation, and local authority decision-making.
In many of these cases, RTI requests have not only revealed information but also triggered debate, reforms, and in some instances, litigation. For ordinary citizens, it has provided a channel to challenge arbitrary decisions by officials—something that was far harder before the law came into force.
Persistent Challenges
The law’s potential, however, has been far from fully realised. Several challenges continue to undermine RTI in practice:
- Delays and Non-Compliance
Many public authorities fail to respond within the statutory timeframe. Some ignore requests entirely, forcing applicants into the lengthy appeal process. - Capacity Gaps
Not all ministries and local bodies have trained or dedicated information officers. Even when they exist, officers may lack resources to process requests properly. - Bureaucratic Resistance
Sri Lanka’s administrative culture remains one of secrecy. Officials often see disclosure as a threat rather than a duty. This mindset creates friction between the spirit of the law and its day-to-day application. - Overuse of Exemptions
Exemptions intended for sensitive matters are frequently misapplied to block legitimate requests. The “national security” clause, in particular, has been invoked in situations where no genuine risk exists. - Awareness Gaps
Public usage of RTI remains heavily concentrated in Colombo and among NGOs, journalists, and lawyers. In rural areas, many citizens are unaware of their right to request information, or lack the means to pursue appeals when denied.
Lessons from Abroad
A comparative look at other countries highlights what Sri Lanka can learn:
- India: The RTI Act of 2005 has been one of the most widely used in the world, driven by strong grassroots mobilisation. Its success lies not only in law but in citizen demand.
- United Kingdom: Under the FOIA 2000, requests are digitally trackable, and independent oversight is centralised. Compliance rates are higher because refusal can be challenged more effectively.
- Regional peers: Countries like Bangladesh and Maldives have similar laws, but Sri Lanka was once regarded as having one of the stronger models in South Asia. Without proper implementation, however, legal strength does not automatically translate into practice.
What Needs to Change
If RTI is to fulfil its promise, several reforms and interventions are needed:
- Strengthen the RTI Commission: It must be adequately funded, staffed, and politically insulated. Its directives should carry enforceable penalties for non-compliance.
- Sanctions for wilful non-disclosure: Officials who deliberately obstruct access should face fines or disciplinary action.
- Capacity building: Continuous training for information officers is essential, especially in local government bodies where compliance is weakest.
- Public awareness campaigns: Citizens, particularly outside urban areas, must be made aware of how RTI works and why it matters. Civil society can play a major role here.
- Digital integration: RTI processes should be linked with e-government platforms, allowing requests to be submitted, tracked, and appealed online. This would reduce delays and improve efficiency.
Why RTI Still Matters
The push for transparency is not simply a legal exercise. At a time when public trust in institutions is fragile, RTI offers a tangible way for citizens to hold the state accountable. Access to information is the foundation of meaningful participation in democracy. Without it, elections become shallow, public debate uninformed, and corruption unchecked.
Sri Lanka’s RTI Act was a bold step forward. But laws are only as effective as the systems and cultures that enforce them. The real test lies not in what the Act says, but in whether officials honour its spirit, and whether citizens continue to demand their right to know.
Conclusion
Nearly a decade on, the Right to Information Act has made cracks in the culture of secrecy, but has not yet dismantled it. Success stories show the law’s potential, yet systemic resistance continues to blunt its edge.
For RTI to deliver fully, Sri Lanka needs a stronger Commission, better trained officers, wider public awareness, and a shift in bureaucratic culture. Transparency must become the norm, not the exception. Only then will the promise of the law—empowered citizens and accountable governance—be truly realised.
For more articles – https://ceylonpublicaffairs.com/
