Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PUBLIC AWARENESS OF ACCESS TO INFORMATION AS A RIGHT IN MALAWI:
A CASE STUDY OF MALIRANA; DEDZA AND CHITAWIRA; BLANTYRE
DISSERTATION
BY
NYALIFIE MTAMBALIKA
BAJ/10/NE/022
Submitted to the Department of Journalism and Media Studies, in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the award of degree of Bachelor of Arts in Journalism
UNIVERSITY OF MALAWI
The Polytechnic
25 May 2015
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I wish to recognize all the individuals who contributed in the study and the dissertation by
assisting me academically, financially and personally. My sincere gratitude goes to the Almighty
God, for the gift of life and perseverance. Father you are enough for me and without you, this
report could not have surfaced. Most importantly, I thank God for being with me throughout my
academic journey.
A special gratitude also goes to my supervisor Mr Kanyang’wa who never gave up on me. He
guided me throughout the project. He was always there to correct and show me the appropriate
approach. I also thank my mother and brother (Catherine and Enos Mtambalika) for the financial
and personal support. I would not have made it through without your financial assistance in my
academic journey. I thank you a lot and may the good Lord bless you. My cousins Madalitso
Saeluzika, Dalitso Goddia, Donnie Chiwonda and Chimwemwe Kamoto, I thank all of you for
your guidance and personal assistance.
I also wish to thank leaders of communities where the study was set (Malirana, Dedza and
Blantyre, Chitawira). I thank the teachers and head teachers in Malirana who took their time for
the survey. I recognise Brother Ganiza for the support during the survey and also great gratitude
should go to all the participants of the study; this report could have been difficult without your
participation.
Another gift of thanks goes to my best friend Charles Ziba, Dyna Mtalimanja, my roommate
Elita Soko and all my classmates for all the support. Life without such friends could have been
difficult. Boundless recognition should go to Patrick Khuleya and Isaac Manda for assisting me
in editing the dissertation. You have been great guiders throughout the study.
Lastly, recognition should go to the Journalism Department for its academic support throughout
the four years in college.
i
DEDICATION
This report is dedicated to my little brother Francis Mtambalika, the Journalism industry and the
citizens of Malawi. Information is a human right need for each and every one.
ii
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY
This research project is my own work and according to my knowledge it has never been
presented anywhere else. It is submitted to the Department of Journalism and Media Studies in
partial fulfilment of the award of a Bachelor of Arts in Journalism. It demonstrates a synopsis of
academic skills attained in the four years of study.
The study “Public Awareness of Access to Information as a Right in Malawi: a Case Study of
Malirana; Dedza and Chitawira; Blantyre” has been covered within the months of January to
May 2015.
Signed ………………………………. Date………………………………….
NYALIFIE ALINAFE MTAMBALIKA (RESEACHER)
iii
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
The undersigned certifies that the dissertation represents the student‘s own effort and has been
submitted with his approval.
Maclan Kanyang’wa
Supervisor‘s Signature:………………………………. Date: ………………………………..
iv
ABSTRACT
Information is a basic human right guaranteed by law for it allows individuals to better
understand government’s role and the decisions being made on their behalf. Access to
Information (ATI) is new development in Malawi such that it is not known and practiced by the
public. This study investigated the public’s awareness of Access to Information as a basic human
right by assessing the number of people who know or do not know ATI as a basic human right. It
also measured the general public consideration and preparedness to demand ATI as a right. It
further on measured the differences that exists in awareness of ATI according to locality,
occupation, education levels, gender and age.
The study found out that there is low awareness of ATI as basic right after conducting a survey
of 148 people in Dedza and Blantyre districts. Furthermore, several people considered ATI as a
basic human right and they were ready to claim for it if it was denied from them by reporting to
authorities, persevering or finding alternative ways of accessing information. Most importantly,
the study found out that the awareness differed depending on different variables in society in
terms of locality, education, occupation, gender and age.
For instance, Blantyre was more knowledgeable than Dedza and the knowledge differed
depending on the gender status of the participants where male participants were more aware than
females. The study also revealed that awareness varied due to the different educational
backgrounds and age. People with tertiary education background were more knowledgeable than
those with only secondary and primary school backgrounds. Likewise, people of 39 ages and
above were knowledgeable than those with the ages below 18.
Therefore the study concluded that awareness is not absent in the public domain though there are
low knowledge levels. People are ready to use and demand for their information right. Hence the
study suggests that there should be more campaigns to ensure that more people know
information as a human right.
TABLE OF CONTENTSv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.......................................................................................................................... i
DEDICATION......................................................................................................................................... ii
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY...................................................................................................iii
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL...........................................................................................................iv
ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................................v
TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................................................vi
LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................................viii
LISTS OF FIGURES.............................................................................................................................. ix
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS................................................................................................x
CHAPTER ONE..............................................................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................1
Background and Context.....................................................................................................................1
Problem Statement...............................................................................................................................3
Aim and Objectives.............................................................................................................................4
Hypothesis...........................................................................................................................................5
Rationale..............................................................................................................................................5
CHAPTER TWO.............................................................................................................................................6
LITERATURE REVIEW........................................................................................................................6
CHAPTER THREE........................................................................................................................................12
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK.........................................................................................................12
Knowledge Gap Hypothesis..............................................................................................................12
Application of theory to the current study.........................................................................................13
Limitations of theory to the study......................................................................................................14
CHAPTER FOUR..........................................................................................................................................15
RESERCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY....................................................................................15
Study Design.....................................................................................................................................15
Population and Sample Size..............................................................................................................15
Sampling Technique..........................................................................................................................16
Data Collection Techniques...............................................................................................................16
Limitations and Constraints...............................................................................................................17
CHAPTER FIVE............................................................................................................................................19
vi
FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE STUDY....................................................................19
Study Findings...................................................................................................................................19
Discussions of Findings.....................................................................................................................29
CHAPTER SIX..............................................................................................................................................33
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................33
Conclusion.........................................................................................................................................33
Recommendations.............................................................................................................................34
Further Area of Study........................................................................................................................34
REFERENCES......................................................................................................................................35
APPENDIX: STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE...........................................................................................38
Questionnaire for information as a Basic Human Right.....................................................................38
APPENDIX B: CHICHEWA QUESIONNAIRE..................................................................................40
Mafunso a za kupezaka Kwa Uthenga ngati Ufulu Wa Chibadwidwe...............................................40
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 awareness levels...............................................................................................................19
Table 2 respondents and knowledge of rights...............................................................................20
Table 3 consideration of ATI right................................................................................................21
Table 4 ATI Significance showing people’s rating on the significance of ATI use in Malawi....22
Table 5 Distribution of people's response to the use of ATI right.................................................22
Table 6 Common themes from respondent’s reactions.................................................................23
Table 7 knowledge awareness levels.............................................................................................24
Table 8 Locality knowledge awareness differences......................................................................24
Table 9 ATI knowledge differences and occupation.....................................................................25
Table 10 ATI knowledge differences and education.....................................................................26
Table 11 ATI knowledge differences and gender..........................................................................27
Table 12 ATI knowledge difference and age................................................................................28
viii
LISTS OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Distribution of participants’ knowledge of ATI..............................................................20
Figure 2 Distribution of respondents' consideration of ATI right.................................................21
Figure 3 Reaction distributions of participants to information denial...........................................23
Figure 4 Chitawira and Malirana ATI knowledge differences in percentage...............................25
Figure 5 ATI knowledge differences and occupation in percentages............................................26
Figure 6 ATI knowledge differences and education......................................................................27
Figure 7 ATI knowledge differences and Gender in percentage...................................................28
Figure 8 ATI knowledge difference and age in percentage...........................................................29
ix
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ATI Access to Information
MISA Media Institute of Southern Africa
NAMISA National Media Institute of Southern Africa
OSISA Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa
ZBS Zodiak Broadcasting Station
SADC Southern Africa Development Community
ACPR African Commission on Human and people’s rights
MP Member of Parliament
x
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Background and Context
In order to ease the problems faced by the media and the general public in accessing information,
some governments have passed and others are in the process of enacting laws on access to
information (ATI) that give citizens and journalists the right to request and receive a wide range
of information from the government. The Constitution of the Republic of Malawi underscored
the importance of ATI by guaranteeing it as a human right. Section 37 states that; “every person
shall have the right of access to all information held by the state or any of its organs at any level
of Government in so far as such information is required for the exercise of his right” (Malawi
Government, 1994).
The government only enshrined the right of ATI in the constitution but never guaranteed it
practically. The importance of ATI in Malawi was highlighted when the government adopted an
Access to Information policy in February, 2014. But the problem still remains the absence of an
enabling legislation that is the ATI law to practically achieve the right of ATI and freedom of the
press. This gap has increased the low awareness of ATI by the general public.
Access to information also referred to as freedom of information, is universally recognized as a
critical element of the promotion and consolidation of democracy and development
(Kanyongolo, 2012). By definition, ATI is a basic human right which consists of the right to
seek, access and receive information from public bodies and private institutions which deals with
government or carry out public functions (National Access to information Policy, 2014). It is one
of the tools for nurturing other social benefits such as access to education and health care, gender
equality, children’s rights, potable water, clean environment, sustainable development and the
fight against corruption.
1
Traditionally, the right of ATI is enshrined in many countries’ constitutions. Even in the absence
of comprehensive national ATI legislation, citizens and advocacy groups in Africa have used
constitutional provisions to access information. But internationally, ATI has increased
substantially since 1977 due to corruption and its corrosive effects which increased the public
awareness (Carter, 2002). As of late, almost 100 countries, including 10 in Africa such as South
Africa, Angola, Zimbabwe and Mozambique, Tunisia, Uganda, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Guinea and
Niger; have national laws or decrees that recognize the public’s right to access information and
records from government but Malawi is amongst the rest of African countries that are still
fighting for ATI.
In Malawi, ATI struggle in general started long before the colonial period. The colonial and one-
party system of government did not make provision for access to public information as a right
(Kanyongolo, 2012). The constitution and government laws favored the secrecy which
encouraged corruption. The 1994 Constitution marked a radical departure from this position by
expressly providing that access to public information held by the state and any of its organs is a
human right in Section 37. Even though it was included in the Constitution, there has been no
practice of ATI in Malawi. Kanyang’wa described this period as information challenge where
there is no legislation to oblige or compel public officials to provide information to the citizens
(Kanyang’wa, 2014).
Upon seeing the injustice and the struggle of having no law for ATI, in 2004, the civil society
organizations in Malawi led by Media Institute of Southern Africa Malawi Chapter (MISA
Malawi) in collaboration of the Ministry of information embarked on a campaign for ATI
legislation. The aim was to help facilitate development and implementation of an enabling
legislation on ATI. This was followed by a draft of ATI in 2005. The bill could not be debated in
parliament as it did not have a policy as a prerequisite for any bill to be tabled in parliament.
Ever since, there has been several meetings with the Members of Parliament, various
government ministries, journalists, traditional authorities, district officers, civil servants, the
police, district education officers, and citizens to come up with the policy.
2
ATI policy was only adopted by Joyce Banda presidency on 27 January, 2014. The National ATI
Policy, therefore, provides directions of how public information should be managed and given
out to the public to enhance popular participation in development (National Access to
information Policy, 2014). It promotes a culture of openness in government and public bodies
that deal with government.
The basic human right of ATI is new development in Malawi such that it is not known and
practiced by the public. Instead it is regarded as a right only for the working class, politicians,
news producers and journalists. But this is not the case; it is every ones right. Everyone has to be
aware of such a vital right in order to effectively exercise it. For that reason, this study was
intended at removing the myth that ATI is for information makers and not the general public.
The public access to government-held information is a basic human right guaranteed to everyone
as it allows individuals to better understand the role of government and the decisions being made
on their behalf. With an informed citizenry, governments can be held accountable for their
policies, and citizens can more effectively choose their representatives (Carter, 2002).
That is why the study was aimed at investigating the public’s awareness of ATI as a basic right
for all. The study collected information from a survey of the Malawi public sampled from two
districts with different characters and privileges of Blantyre and Dedza. The participants were
given questions to answer about their knowledge of ATI as a law and a basic human right. The
two districts knowledge was then differentiated to find out who has more knowledgeable than the
other. The study further evaluated the public’s determination for demanding the right. This was
crucial because the publics’ knowledge of ATI would also ensure the proper usage of the right.
Problem Statement
Kanyongolo (2012) study on Obstacles to ATI in Malawi established that the public do not
regard information as one of the important basic rights; as a result MISA Malawi embarked on a
campaign to raise awareness and knowledge among the general public and stakeholders on the
need to have the ATI bill. MISA Malawi also wanted to establish knowledge, competency and
capacity of the general public to demand information from duty bearers for the exercise of their 3
right. Therefore, MISA Malawi conducted meetings through the OSISA and Tilitonse funding
project in 2012 and 2013 respectively. The project consisted of 13 public debates or discussion
programmes on ATI that were aired live on Zodiak Broadcasting Station (ZBS), meetings with
the Members of Parliament (MPs) and meetings with leaders (traditional authorities, district
officers, religious leaders, district education, health, or agriculture officers) in selected number of
districts such as Chitipa, Nkhata Bay, Kasungu, Salima, Thyolo and Nsanje (Kanyang’wa, 2014).
For that reason, the study was aimed at investigating the public’s awareness of ATI by
associating with the public in general following MISA Malawi’s campaign. There was a need to
investigate what the general public knows pertaining to ATI and how they intended to demand or
use it. The question the study was asking was; does the general public know ATI as a basic right
for all and are they willing to demand for it?
Aim and Objectives
Aim
The aim of the study was to examine the extent in which the general public was aware of ATI as
a basic right for all.
Objectives
Specifically, the study aimed at
1. Measuring the extent in which the general public considered the right of access to
information as a right.
2. Measuring the extent in which the members of the general public were prepared to
demand information as a right.
3. Measuring the differences in awareness of ATI right according to locality, occupation,
age, gender and education levels.
4
Hypothesis
The study’s hypothesis assumed the following;
1. There was relatively low awareness of ATI as a basic right to the public.
2. The knowledge level was assumed to be higher in urban community compared to the
rural areas.
Rationale
The study was conducted to assess the knowledge awareness of the general public of ATI. By
conducting the survey alone, there will be known status of people’s ATI knowledge. The survey
will assist in having the estimated statistics available in the public and their realisation of
information as a human right. Malawi as a country will have the statistics of people’s awareness
of their basic human rights including the information right. In addition to that, Malawi will have
an estimation of publics’ determination on demanding information if need be.
Secondly, the study results will also assist human rights organisations like MISA Malawi,
Ministry of Information and Ministry of Justice to have estimation on how Malawi as a country
is ready to exercise information as a basic human right. Through the results, such organisations
will be guided in their yearly activities to ensure that people are exercising and using the
information right.
The study was results will also guide human rights organisations to review the approach they
follow in making awareness of human rights to the general public.
In this chapter, ATI has been introduced, defined and given its background information. The
problem statement of the study as well as the main aim, objectives, hypothesis and rationale of
the study were also given. In the subsequent chapter, literature review of the study is discussed.
5
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter consist of all the topics related to ATI. There are a wide range of studies on ATI
even though the problems are different from this study. The study paid attention to all studies
about the law itself and information as a basic human right.
Kanyongolo (2012) study on Obstacles to ATI in Malawi is closely related to the problem
understudy. His study revealed that ATI is wanted most frequently from the government and
non-governmental organizations but that such access is hold back by a number of obstacles. The
obstacles were, related to characteristics of information seekers, user related obstacles, the
interface through which such access is sought, the social system in which the interface occurs,
and the prevailing policy and legal framework (Kanyongolo, 2012). A relevance of the user
related obstacles is what this study paid attention to. These obstacles are for instance, levels of
formal education, awareness of the right to information, literacy, social norms, financial
resources, and significant interface-based obstacles. The study isolated an example of user
related obstacle which is the awareness of right to information.
The researcher endeavored to collect data through interviews of officials of a sample of
community based organizations in Mwanza and Zomba. He selected two districts which were
informed by the findings of the literature review which suggested that, underlying obstacles to
access to public information are determined by socio-economic factors such as levels of
education, literacy rates, poverty, and centralization of bureaucracy and availability of ICT
services. The study sought to explore these variations by selecting one urban area, namely,
Zomba and one rural location, namely Mwanza. The interviews he used were semi-structured
based on key questions that sought responses on the importance of information in the activities
of the community based organizations; the sources of public information that were approached
most frequently; the level of difficulty involved in gaining access to public information; and the
reasons for the difficulty of accessing public information held by various duty bearers.
6
In his findings, he found out that low levels of public awareness of the right to information
obstruct the ability of people to demand access to such information, let alone seek to enforce it,
as a matter of right. Kanyongolo cited the 2011 Baseline Survey on Justice, which the National
Statistical Office found that only 45.8% of respondents surveyed were aware of their basic
human rights and that awareness levels were 64.5 % among urban respondents as compared to
41.7% among rural respondents. The survey further found that the right to access public
information was not considered to be among the ten rights considered to be most important by
respondents. He concluded that people pay no attention to the importance of information as a
basic human right.
Kanyang’wa (2014) conducted an evaluation report on MISA Malawi ATI project funded by
Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa (OSISA). His argument was based on reporting the
process and route ATI has taken and the background information of the policy which add value
to the study. According to Kanyang’wa, the ATI campaign which is championed by MISA
Malawi was drafted as a bill in 2005 and was established with an aim to assist facilitation of
development and implementation on an enabling legislation on ATI. With the help of different
civil society organizations of stakeholders such as MPs, various government ministries,
journalists and the police they managed to put in place a draft ATI Bill.
The drafted bill was hence presented to the minister of information who later on in 2010 formed
a task force to head the whole process. Malawi Government adopted the ATI Policy on 27
January 2014 which is a big step to having the ATI Bill (Kanyang’wa, 2014). The report was
also based on reporting the activities of the project by MISA Malawi which aimed at raising
public awareness on the need to have ATI and lobbing for public demand for ATI. It further on
assessed the extent to which the project achieved its objectives based on following indicators: a
refined policy on ATI approved by cabinet so as to clear the way for the passing of the ATI bill,
holding of consultative meetings with principal secretaries and directors in government, holding
awareness, consultative and lobby meetings on the draft ATI policy with strategic MPs within
the parliamentary committees to make them aware of the contents of the bill and holding of 10
7
public debates broadcast live on radio on the need to pass the bill into law to increase public
awareness and participation of the campaign.
He also assessed how OSISA support and funding has contributed to the achievements of the
project; the extent to which MISA Malawi Chapter has leveraged participation of other
organizations in the project; how women and the youth have been involved in the project and
lessons and challenges encountered in the implementation of the project. This was done through
in-depth interviews with key informants, i.e. opinion leaders, media practitioners and
stakeholders who participated in the project and documents such as the Malawi Constitution,
newspaper reports and articles dealing with the issue of ATI were reviewed. The evaluation also
considered minutes and reports of the various meetings and conferences undertaken during the
implementation of the project, among other documentation.
Neuman (2002) study on ATI: A Key to Development is the other publication which is closely
related to the study. In the publication, there are different papers of different scholars who argued
on different issues relating to ATI. What really made an impression of the publication is the
foreword that shaded more light on ATI association with the citizen. Neaman argued that
although often considered in the fight against corruption, ATI is equally critical for citizens’
capacity to exercise their rights and to uphold the responsibilities and accountability of their
leaders. ATI laws allow individuals and groups to understand the policies with which the
government makes determinations relating to health, education, housing and infrastructure. It is
in the same publication that two papers Access to Government Information; An Overview of
Issues and ATI: How Is It Useful and How Is It Used are found.
Roberts (1999) study on Access to Government Information; an Overview of Issues is also of
significance to the study. In his paper he argued that access to laws can be ineffective if citizens
and non-governmental organizations lack the capacity to exercise their right of access. His
arguments on evaluating how much the public knows about ATI was that even if the ATI Policy
is passed as a bill in a country, there would be no use of the policy if the public itself does not
know of its existence or how to use it. This is why this study was undertaken to establish whether
8
the general public has sufficient knowledge of the right to demand information from all public
bodies.
Robert identified a few countries that have entrenched a right of access in their constitutions.
This only showed that the formal recognition of access rights is now essential if institutions hope
to maintain popular legitimacy. He identified the British law, which proposed ATI in 1999 and
adopted a blanket exemption of all material relating to the formulation or development of
government policy and also an exemption of information where disclosure would be likely to
inhibit the free exchange of views. The Australian law also allows Cabinet ministers to issue a
conclusive certificate that limits the ability of tribunals to review their decisions to withhold this
information.
Calland (2002) study on ATI: How Is It Useful and How Is It Used is also relevant to the study
more especially on the importance of information participation as information does not only
empower the media but also the citizens. He explained how a meaningful participation in
democratic processes requires informed participants restrain secrecy which hinders information
availability to the citizenry, hobbling their ability to participate meaningfully. He explained more
on the need for the citizens and journalists to fully participate in the democratic process during
the information age because information is not just a necessity for people. He further on stated
that there is no point in having a law that provides for the right to access to information, if there
is not at the same time a clear and workable system of mechanisms to enable citizens to use the
law. Calland suggested that in terms of government, ATI allows people to analyze the actions of
their government and is the basis for informed debate of those actions. He used a case study of
South Africa, which has access to information law (Calland, 2002).
So This Is Democracy? (2013), is the publication which MISA produces each year for the state
of media freedom in Southern Africa based on the organizational daily monitoring and other
study gathered in the 11 Southern Africa Development Community (SADC). In the 20th edition
which this study is mainly interested in, the publication recorded that there is growth of the
recognition for citizen’s claim to their right to information. This was due to the crafting of a
model of ATI law by the African Commission on Human and people’s rights (ACPR). Many
9
countries that adopted the model managed to design their own law and it is either signed or
became a law. Out of the 11 countries that makes MISA, only three had had their laws passed in
the year 2013 (South Africa, Zimbabwe and Angola). Three countries; Malawi, Tanzania and
Zambia, had their laws on progress such that the author applauded Malawi for having its policy
adopted in ATI after a long battle for the law.
The basis of the publication was on the current state of ATI as upsetting because governments
still use national security and data protection laws to block the process of enacting ATI laws. It
isolated a few examples of such governments like the Zimbabwe, Botswana and South Africa.
Botswana media were surprised in 2013 when the president took an opportunity with the State of
the Nation address to announce plans for the Data protection bill instead of the long waited
freedom of information bill. The same case happened in Zimbabwe which has ATI law but its
extent is limited because of the low levels of awareness among the public and lastly, South
Africa’s journalists maintained their strong opposition to the protection of State Information bill
(M’ule, 2013).
Mulomole (2012) study on the Government Secrecy in an Information Age; 2012 Report on the
Most Open and Secretive Government Institutions in Malawi is the study that argues for the level
of ATI in public institutions in Malawi. It is one way of installing a culture of transparency
amongst public officials. This study found out that the government ministries in Malawi are still
not open and they do not give out information. The study assumes that government officials are
the main sources of news hence they need to open up for the easy access to information
(Mulomole, 2012). The study found out only three out of the eight sampled governments and
ministries participated in the study. The results of the study indicated that the four public
institutions easily qualify the most secretive public institution, but the award went to Blantyre
District Council. Lilongwe Water Board became the recipient of the 2012 Golden Key award for
the most open and transparent public institution in Malawi.
Daniels (2010) speech Access to Information and the Right to Know – a Namibian Perspective,
paid attention to the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights’ Declaration on
Freedom of Expression adopted by African States in 2002 which also this study was interested
10
in. He argued that ATI is a fundamental human right in any constitutional democracy and no
country can truly call itself democratic, unless citizens have the right to access and request
information that is held by public and certain private bodies.
What really made an impression for this study was the quotations he quoted from the same
African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights’ Declaration on Freedom of Expression on
ATI; for instance, that public bodies hold information not for themselves but as custodians of the
public good and everyone has a right to access this information, subject only to clearly defined
rules established by law. Then he also identified another principle that the right to information
shall be guaranteed by law in accordance with the following principles such as: that everyone
has the right to access information held by public bodies; everyone has the right to access
information held by private bodies which is necessary for the exercise or protection of any right;
any refusal to disclose information shall be subject to appeal to an independent body and/or the
courts; public bodies shall be required, even in the absence of a request, actively to publish
important information of significant public interest; and secrecy laws shall be amended as
necessary to comply with freedom of information principles (Daniels, 2010).
Daniels (2010) also he paid attention to the last principle that everyone has the right to access
and update or otherwise correct their personal information, whether it is held by public or by
private bodies. He stated that ATI about government decisions, statistics, research findings,
commission’s findings, new laws and policies, are important, because it affects almost everyone
in society. The argument was that the more any decision is likely to affect people, the more
important it is that the relevant information be shared as widely as possible. Citizens need to be
informed for them to be able to form an opinion and express their views on the state of affairs.
This chapter focused on discussions of all ATI related studies from either related or not related
topics. The main emphasis was on Kanyongolo study which this study is based on. In the next
chapter, the theoretical framework of the study is discussed.
11
CHAPTER THREE
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
This chapter provides the details of the theoretical framework of the study, application of theory
to the study and the limitations of the theory to the study. The theory used in this study is
knowledge gap hypothesis.
Knowledge Gap Hypothesis
In formulation of a theoretical perspective for studying the public’s awareness of ATI as a basic
human right, knowledge gap hypothesis theory gives a helpful model. Knowledge Gap
Hypothesis theory of the mass communication is described as an increasing gap between higher
and lower educated people. It is concerned with information and knowledge and it emphasizes
that knowledge is not distributed equally throughout the society, such that people with higher
socioeconomic status tend to have better ability to acquire information (Weng, 2000).
Knowledge and gap theory is a term coined to refer to the structured differences in information
levels between groups in a society (Mc Quail, 2005). The theory was first proposed by Philip J
Tichenor, George Donohue and Clarice Olien in the early 1970s. Knowledge gap hypothesis
states that “As the infusion of mass media information into a social system increases segments of
the population with higher socioeconomic status tend to acquire this information at a faster rate
than the lower status segments, so that the gap in knowledge between these segments tends to
increase rather than decrease” (Severin and Tankard, 2001).
In 1970s, Tichenor, Donohue and Olien at the University of Minnesota, conducted a research to
identify the knowledge gap among people. For that they divided people into two groups, one
with individuals with higher education and one with individuals who had lower education. Their
study asked respondents of college, high school or grade school education to answer the question
12
of whether astronauts would ever reach the moon. Those with high education level were more
likely to agree the question followed by those in high school than those in grade school.
The argument was that as the access to mass media increases such segments of population
inevitably gains information faster than the segment that have minimal access hence the wide
gap increases with the lower economic status of the population. The knowledge gap hypothesis
thus seems to suggest itself as a fundamental explanation for the apparent failure of mass
publicity to inform the public at large (Tichenor, Donohue and Olien, 1970). Therefore,
information in society is not evenly acquired by every member of society such that people with
higher socioeconomic status tend to have better ability to acquire information than those with
lower socioeconomic status.
Likewise Eveland and Scheufele (2000) argued that a knowledge gap research has consistently
demonstrated differential knowledge gain across education or socio- economic status. Thus
people with higher levels of education, the ones who typically have more rehearsed information
processing skills (Grabe, Lang, Zhaou & Bolls, 2000), broader and background knowledge and
more thoroughgoing interest in public affairs issues (Price and Zaller, 1993, Tichenor et al,
1970); acquire more information than less educated people. This simply suggests that the more
educated an individual is, the more they are likely to have more information than an individual
who is not educated.
Application of theory to the current study
The application of the knowledge gap theory to the study was centered on the hypothesis that
there was a relatively low awareness of ATI as a basic right to the public and that the knowledge
level was even higher in urban community compared to the rural areas. The study presupposed
that there was a gap of knowledge between the two areas; the theory assisted in assessing the
differences of ATI knowledge as a basic right between rural (Dedza) and urban areas (Blantyre).
The assumption was that the urban audiences are the ones who have more knowledge and
demanding of ATI compared to the audience in the rural areas. For such, the study assessed the
knowledge awareness of the two areas and differentiated from the results.
13
The knowledge gap was further on applicable on knowledge differences existing on education
levels between people that had the primary, secondary and tertiary education qualifications. Like
the theory suggested, that people with primary or secondary levels were the ones who do not
know ATI compared to the ones who attained for higher education (tertiary). People with higher
levels of education, the ones who typically have more rehearsed information processing skills,
broader and background knowledge and more thoroughgoing interest in public affairs issues;
acquire more information than less educated people (Grabe, Lang, Zhaou & Bolls, 2000; Price
and Zaller, 1993, Tichenor et al, 1970). The study also drew the differences of information
between different kinds of occupations, age and gender.
Limitations of theory to the study
The theory had the following limitations:
1. It wrongly assumes that rural people are not educated such that all urban people are well
educated and knowledgeable. Through the study, there were observations that not all
people in rural area are uneducated. Almost high percentages of people were
knowledgeable.
2. It definitely prejudiced people with lower socioeconomic as less knowledgeable than
people with higher socioeconomic.
3. The theory is outdated because information is equally shared between two different
socioeconomic areas due to technology and pluralistic media.
This chapter provided the discussion of the theoretical framework of the study, the application of
the study and the limitations of the theory used to the study. In the next chapter, study
methodology is discussed in terms of the study design, sample and data technique.
14
CHAPTER FOUR
RESERCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
This chapter discusses methods that were used to collect and assess the content for this particular
study. It provides in details the study design, population and sample, sample techniques, data
analysis techniques and the limitation and constraints of the study.
Study Design
The study employed the quantitative study method in which a survey was conducted on the two
different selected populations. Creswell (2009) defined quantitative study method as a means for
testing objective theory by examining the relationship among variables, for instance awareness is
an independent variable while ATI, Age, gender and education are dependent variables. The
study paid attention to the Quantitative method because it is more advantageous as it measures
the reactions of many people in a limited set of questions (Patton, 2002). Furthermore, the study
was more interested in quantifying the public’s awareness of ATI as a basic human right.
Baker identified survey study as one of the examples of quantitative study (Baker, 1999). A
survey is defined as an empirical study that uses questionnaires or interviews to discover
descriptive characteristics. A descriptive survey study in which the study based its focus on is
simply a plan of quantitative or numerical description of trends, attitudes or opinions of a
population by studying a sample of that population. The study has basically a sample of two
different populations which are differentiated to analyse which one is more knowledgeable than
the other.
Population and Sample Size
Malawi population totals to 16.4 million with 8.2 million females and 8.2 million males
(National Statistics of Malawi). By definition, a sample is the segment of the population that is
15
selected for investigation (Bryman, 2008). A sample of 200 people in two different areas from
the population of 16.4 million was drawn in the study; 100 people from Malirana, Dedza which
has a higher listenership of ZBS and another sample of 100 people from Chitawira in Blantyre
which has a lot of working class. Quantitative researches such as surveys are particularly useful
in describing the characteristics of a large population (Babbie, 2007).
Sampling Technique
The study used a probability sampling where by each case that could be chosen (Severing and
Tankard, 2001). A stratified probability sampling was a type of sampling which the study paid
attention to. This sampling technique divided the sample from the population into two different
homogeneous groups before randomly selecting the participants. Dominick and Wimmer (2011)
described a stratified sampling as a sampling measure that ensures that a sample is drawn from a
homogeneous subset of the population that is, from a population that has similar characteristics
for instance, rural and urban masses. This was the approach used to get adequate representation
of a subset because when using a stratified sampling, the researcher firstly divides the population
into subpopulations on the basis of supplementary information to relevant strata, a random
sample is drawn from each stratum (Fourie, 2009).
Data Collection Techniques
The study used questionnaires when collecting information. Questionnaires are probably one of
the oldest and best known ways of investigating social phenomena (Fourie, 2009) and these
questionnaires were both filled by the participants on their own and some with the help of the
researcher. The questionnaires which were administered to the urban audience were self-
administered where by the participants filled themselves as they were able to read and write. On
the other hand, the questionnaires that were administered in the rural were filled by the
researcher as some people did not know how to read and write.
16
Furthermore, the study used two different questionnaires for the areas in terms of language. The
urban used the English questionnaire while the rural had Chichewa questionnaire. Two hundred
questionnaires were issued to the audience one hundred in Malirana, Dedza and another one
hundred in Chitawira Blantyre. But unfortunately due to problems like lack of respondent’s will
to return the questionnaires or incomplete questionnaires by respondents, only 148
questionnaires were answered, 79 from Malirana and 69 from Chitawira.
Specific questions were asked to determine the extent in which the aim and objectives of the
study were assessed. To draw and have an estimation of the public consideration of right of ATI
and the extent in which the public was willing to demand information as a right the following
questions were asked; would you consider information as a basic human right, do you know what
ATI policy is and can you rate the importance of information as a right. These questions were
asked to quantify the answers and draw conclusions. With an aid of current area of location,
education level and occupation on the questionnaire, the differences in awareness of ATI right
were drawn.
Limitations and Constraints
The study used two languages to communicate effectively to rural people. But ATI proved to be
difficult as it was hard to translate terminologies of the area of study. In addition to that, even
though, the study isolated only two districts due to financial resource constraints; the further
reduced number of participants to 200, the study ended up having 148 people because of lack of
interest from the participants. Worse still, it was difficult to reach a lot of males from Dedza,
because they resisted to interact with a female researcher. Only women participated although in
most occasions they failed to answer the questions.
Major problems were faced in Chitawira where most of the questionnaires got lost. People
showed interest to participate but they ended up not returning the questionnaires back to the
researcher. The loss of interest in both areas was due to the absence of issuing some money to
17
the participants. They refused to attend to the survey that did not provide any resources in
exchange of their knowledge.
In the chapter, methods for the study, the design, population and sample, sample techniques, data
analysis techniques and the limitation and constraints of the study were discussed. In the next
chapter, data is analysed and interpreted.
18
CHAPTER FIVE
FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE STUDY
This section of the chapter presents the findings and interpretations drawn from the researchers
study on Public Awareness of Access to Information as a Right in Malawi: A Case Study of
Malirana; Dedza and Chitawira; Blantyre. This study has collected data from two areas;
Malirana, Dedza and Chitawira, Blantyre where 148 questionnaires were responded.
Study Findings
For the purpose of analysis, the findings of the study were basically based on the following
premises: ATI knowledge as a basic human right, consideration of ATI as a basic human right,
people’s determination to demand information as a right and the differences in awareness of ATI
on locality, occupation, education, gender and age.
ATI Knowledge as a basic human right
AWARENESS LEVELS TO ATI Frequency Percent
YES 51 34.5
NO 82 55.4
NOT SURE 15 10.1
Total 148 100.0
Table 1 awareness levels
The results above shows that 82 respondents out of the 148 participants were not aware of ATI,
51 were aware and 15 were not sure.
19
Figure 1 Distribution of participants’ knowledge of ATI
Respondents and Knowledge of Rights
RIGHTS Frequency Percent
LISTED INFORMATION 6 4.1
LISTED FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION 10 6.8
LISTED FREEDOM OF SPEECH 9 6.1
LISTED OTHER RIGHTS i.e. education, voting 96 64.9
LISTED NONE 27 18.2
Total 148 100.0
Table 2 respondents and knowledge of rights
The table above shows the summary of the respondents and the kind of human rights they know.
The most listed rights were other rights such as right to life, right to privacy, right to vote, to go
to the church of your choice and right to education and good health facility. Information was the
least listed right.
20
Consideration of ATI as a basic right
Respondents consideration of ATI right Frequency Percent
YES 112 75.7
NO 30 20.3
NOT SURE 6 4.1
Total 148 100.0
Table 3 consideration of ATI right
The table above shows that a lot of respondents considered ATI as basic right with a total of 112
people. The remaining 36 people did not consider or were not sure.
Figure 2 Distribution of respondents' consideration of ATI right
How the respondents rate the use of right to ATI in Malawi
Even though a lot of people responded that they regard information as a basic human right, most
of them failed to give the actual rating of information right in Malawi. A total of 77 people did
not provide any ranking of the function of ATI as showed from the table above and 29 people
21
ranked the use as the least functional (below 4). The remaining 42 people ranked ATI as either
the most functional and moderate use.
Significance Frequency Percent
LEAST FUNCTIONAL - BELOW 4 29 19.6
MODERATE USE – 5 21 14.2
MOST FUNCTIONAL - ABOVE 5 21 14.2
NONE 77 52.0
Total 148 100.0
Table 4 ATI Significance showing people’s rating on the significance of ATI use in Malawi
Respondents and their Determination to Demand information as a right
This was determined by the participants will to use ATI and their response of demanding for
their information need.
Does the respondents wish to use ATI as a right
Out of 148 people, 119 people were ready to use ATI as a right; 16 people were not ready to use
it and 13 people were not sure of what they would do.
Table 5 Distribution of people's response to the use of ATI right
22
Common Themes from respondents’ for information denial by public official
COMMON THEMES FROM RESPONDENTS REACTIONS Frequency Percent
REPORTING TO AUTHORITIES 60 40.5
PERSISTENCE 17 11.5
FINDING AN ALTERNATIVE WAY 32 21.6
JUST STAY 27 18.2
NONE 12 8.1
Total 148 100.0
Table 6 Common themes from respondent’s reactions
As shown above, the common theme of the respondents the reactions was reporting to authorizes
with the total of 60 people.
Figure 3 Reaction distributions of participants to information denial
Differences in awareness of ATI right
In order to measure the differences in awareness of ATI right according to locality, occupation,
education levels, gender and age; Cross tabulation was employed.
23
Awareness distribution total
This was the results of the knowledge people has about ATI in the study.
DO THE PUBLIC KNOW ATI Frequency Percent
YES 51 34.5
NO 82 55.4
NOT SURE 15 10.1
Total 148 100.0
Table 7 knowledge awareness levels
Locality differences
DO THE PUBLIC KNOW ATI LOCATION Total
DEDZA,
MALIRANA
BLANTYRE,
CHITAWIRA
YES 14 37 51
NO 61 21 82
NOT SURE 7 8 15
Total 82 66 148
Table 8 Locality knowledge awareness differences
The results show that 37 people who were aware of ATI from Chitawira and 14 people were
from Malirana.
24
Figure 4 Chitawira and Malirana ATI knowledge differences in percentage
Occupation Differences
DO THE
PUBLIC
KNOW ATI
OCCUPATION Total
PUBLIC
OFFICIAL
SELF
EMPLOYED
COMPANY
CONTRACT
STUDENTS NONE
YES 16 19 7 8 1 51
NO 12 38 8 12 12 82
NOT SURE 7 3 3 1 1 15
Total 35 60 18 21 14 148
Table 9 ATI knowledge differences and occupation
The table shows that 19 people that knew ATI were self-employed.
25
Figure 5 ATI knowledge differences and occupation in percentages
Education Differences
DO THE PUBLIC
KNOW ATI
EDUCATION LEVEL Total
TERTIARY SECONDARY
SCHOOL
PRIMARY
SCHOOL
YES 40 9 2 51
NO 29 34 19 82
NOT SURE 12 3 0 15
Total 81 46 21 148
Table 10 ATI knowledge differences and education
The table shows that 40 people that knew ATI had done their tertiary education
26
Figure 6 ATI knowledge differences and education
Gender Differences
DO THE PUBLIC KNOW ATI GENDER Total
MALE FEMALE
YES 32 19 51
NO 44 38 82
NOT SURE 9 6 15
Total 85 63 148
Table 11 ATI knowledge differences and gender
32 males knew ATI while 19 female knew ATI.
27
Figure 7 ATI knowledge differences and Gender in percentage
Age differences
DO THE PUBLIC
KNOW ATI
AGE Total
BELOW 18 19- 28 29-38 ABOVE 39
YES 0 16 16 19 51
NO 4 44 14 20 82
NOT SURE 1 4 3 7 15
Total 5 64 33 46 148
Table 12 ATI knowledge difference and age
19 people who knew ATI were above the age of 39.
28
Figure 8 ATI knowledge difference and age in percentage
Discussions of Findings
The main purpose of this study was to investigate the public’s awareness of Access to
Information as a basic human right by assessing the number of people who know or do not know
ATI as a basic human right. The study found out that knowledge awareness level on ATI within
the study sites is low. From the Table 1, out of the 148 respondents, 51 acknowledge being
conversant with ATI representing 34.5% of sample. The total of 82 respondents did not
acknowledged ATI representing 55.4% of the sample. Only 34.5% of the participants were aware
of ATI and 10% were not sure if they knew the ATI right. This means that, the general public is
not aware of ATI as the 55.4 percentage of the participants did not know ATI. This is in line with
the study question that proposed that there is low levels of awareness as well as the suggestions
made by the literature (Kanyongolo, 2012), hypothesis and the theory.
The low level of awareness was further determined by the participants’ capability of identifying
information as one of the basic human rights they know. Unfortunately, out of the 148
respondents; only 4.1% of the participants included information amongst the basic human rights
they know, the remaining percentages were distributed to those who either identified other rights
29
and freedom of expression and speech. This only justified that there is little awareness levels of
ATI as a basic human right.
The second objective of the study was to assess the public consideration of ATI as a basic human
right. This was achieved by letting the participants to rate ATI and choose whether they regarded
information as a right. As shown in Table 3, the finding on consideration of ATI as a basic
human right was high as the 75.7% of the sample considered ATI as basic human right and the
remaining 24.4% was shared among those who did not consider and not sure with 20.3% and
4.1% respectively. Even though a lot of respondents considered information as a basic human
right, most of them failed to give the actual rating of information right in Malawi. The total of
52% failed to provide any ranking of the function of ATI, 19.6% ranked the use as the least
functional, 14.2% ranked ATI use in Malawi as the most functional and another 14.2% also
ranked the use of ATI as a moderate function here in Malawi. This only shows that even though,
most of the participants consider ATI as a human right, most of them do not regard it as
important with 71.6 %.
The third purpose of the study which is the measure of publics’ readiness to demand for ATI and
their reaction to information denial were categorized in five major themes as shown in the Table
6. The main determinant of the public demand was the response of either reporting to the
authorities and perseverance. From Table 6, 52% of the participants were ready to demand for
the information while the remaining 48% were not. The results are negatively related with the
responses of the participants when they were asked if they wished to use the information right as
80% were ready to use ATI as a right; 10.8% were not ready to use it and 8.8% were not sure of
what they would do. This hence simply shows that in regardless of the low awareness levels, the
public is ready to demand for their information right by reporting to the authorities or
persevering. Only a few preferred exchanging information with money or do nothing about it.
The final purpose of the study of drawing differences of awareness levels in terms of location,
occupation, education level, gender and age. In the study findings, it showed that there were
differences in the knowledge level of ATI between different demographics of the study on
locality, occupation, education, gender and age. On locality differences; regardless of the low
30
knowledge awareness of ATI of 34.5%; there were some differences between the two locations
of the study and the available knowledge. According to Table 7, out of the 34.5% of the
participants that knew ATI; 9.5% were from Malirana while 25% from Chitawira; out of the total
of 55.4% that did not know ATI, 14.2% were from Chitawira and 41.2% were from Malirana and
lastly, out of the 10.1% who were not sure if they knew ATI or not, 4.7% were from Malirana
and 5.4% were from Chitawira.
This means that Blantyre people are more knowledgeable than those people that live in Dedza
with a percentage of 25 out of 9.5 and Malirana had more people that did not know ATI than
Chitawira representing a percentage of 41.2 out of 14.2. This simply shows that more knowledge
is in urban than rural as also stipulated by the hypothesis that assumes that the urban audiences
are the ones who have more knowledge of ATI compared to the audience in the rural areas and
the study theory that states that there are structured differences in information levels between
groups in a society such as rural and urban (Mc Quail, 2005).
On the differences existing on occupation showed in Table 8, it is justified that out of the total of
34.5% who knew ATI, self-employed people were the ones with higher knowledge, followed by
public officials and students and knowledge was lower amongst private employed people and
unemployed as the 12.9% were self-employed, 10.8% were public officials, 4.7% were company
employed, 5.4% were students and one unemployed person (2.7%). In addition to that, out of the
55.4% who did not know ATI, 25.7% were self-employed, 8.1% were public officials, students
and unemployed and 8.1% were employed by private companies. The result agrees with the
hypothesis that assumed that unemployed would have no knowledge compared to employed
participants. The theory also stipulates that segments of population such as good occupation
inevitably gains information faster than the segment that have minimal access like the
unemployed hence the wide gap increases with the lower economic status of the population.
The education differences on Table 9 showed that out of the 34.5% that knew about ATI, 27.1%
had done their tertiary education, 6.1% had secondary education and 1.3% had primary school
certificates. This only means that people who had undergone tertiary education are more aware
than those with secondary and primary school certificates. Thus the results go hand in hand with
31
the knowledge gap theory that states that people who have more educational qualifications are
more aware than those with less qualification like primary school. Indeed information in society
is not evenly acquired by every member of society such that people with higher socioeconomic
status tend to have better ability to acquire information than those with lower socioeconomic
status (Severin and Tankard, 2001).
The differences on gender as shown in Table 10 above, from 34.5% participants that knew ATI;
21.6% were males while 12.9% were female which means that more male participants were
knowledgeable than females. In the same way, the knowledge gap hypothesis theory also argued
on the same basis; women as a minority group lacks awareness than men. The theory suggest
that there is a fundamental explanation for the apparent failure of mass publicity to inform the
public at large (Tichenor, Donohue and Olien, 1970).
Age differences as shown in the Table 11 that 34.5% that knew ATI 12.9% were above 39,
10.8% were between the ages of 29 – 38, another 10.8% were in between the age of 19 – 28 and
no one of the age below 18 knew ATI. This means that, elder people of above 39 are more
knowledgeable than those between than ages of 19 – 28 and 29 – 39 who are even more
knowledgeable than those of the age below 18. Furthermore out of the 55.4% that did not know
ATI, 29.7% were between the ages of 19 – 28, 13.5% were above 39, 9.5% were of the ages 29-
38 and 2.7% were below 18. Lastly, out of 10.1% that were not sure, 4.7% were above 39, 2.7%
were between the ages of 19 – 28, 2% between the ages of 29 – 38 and 0.6% was below 18 years.
That is the knowledge gap increases to younger people compared to older people. This hence
goes hand in hand with the study theory which states that there is a gap between two different
groups of people as people with higher socioeconomic status tend to have better ability to
acquire information (Weng, 2000).
32
CHAPTER SIX
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusion
Knowledge is power. With knowledge, and good ATI, countries and governments succeed.
Calland (2002) argued that there is no point in having a law that provides for the right to access
to information, if there is not at the same time a clear and workable system of mechanisms to
enable citizens to use the law. Equally, ATI would be useless if the public are not ready to use it.
Just like Roberts (1999) argued that access to laws can be ineffective if citizens and non-
governmental organizations lack the capacity to exercise their right of access. That is why the
main thesis of the study was to quantify the ATI knowledge awareness of the public.
This was done by conducting a survey to collect information from Malawi public of the two
sampled districts with different characters and privileges of Blantyre and Dedza. It had the total
number of 148 people which was given questions to answer about their knowledge of ATI as a
law and a basic human right. The results of the two districts were then differentiated to find out
who had more knowledge than the other according to locality, occupation, age, gender and
education levels. This study also measured the general public consideration of the right of ATI as
a right and the estimate of the general public’s preparedness to demand information as a right.
The study found out that there is low awareness of ATI as basic right after conducting a survey
of 148 people in Dedza and Blantyre districts. Furthermore, several people considered ATI as a
basic human right and they were ready to claim for it if it was denied from them by reporting to
authorities, persevering or finding alternative ways of accessing information. Most importantly,
the study found out that the awareness differed depending on different variables in society in
terms of locality, education, occupation, gender and age. For instance, Blantyre was more aware
than Dedza. The study revealed that awareness also varied due to the different educational
backgrounds and gender. People with tertiary education background were more knowledgeable
33
than those with only secondary and primary school levels. Furthermore, male were more
knowledgeable than females.
Therefore from the study results, it shows that the awareness is not absent in the public domain
even though there are low knowledge levels. With the available 34.5% of awareness, it shows
that there is no gap in the public domain. People know ATI slightly below the average. In
addition to that, the public considered ATI as a basic human right but all they lack is how to use
it and when. Furthermore, people are ready to demand for their information right by either
reporting to the authorities or persevering.
Recommendations
There should be more campaigns to ensure that people know information as a human right
guaranteed by law. Indeed few percentages of people know ATI but they do not regard it as a
human right in practice. There hence should be campaign programs to focus on the need of
information right. Organizations like MISA Malawi and Minister of Information should utilize
and maximize the media to teach and drive the information right. In addition to that, they should
focus more on public campaigns which involves local people and not their leaders only.
ATI through this study proved to be a difficult and not flexible phrase. It was difficult to come
up with vernacular terms relating to the study. There is need of refining the local terminologies
of ATI. The public should now regard information as one of the basic human rights. Regardless
of the still less knowledge of ATI, people should be learn to appreciate information as equal to
all other human rights. Illiteracy as a major drive to low knowledge should be revisited. People
are educated and they know ATI; what they need is an encouragement to use and demand for
information where need be.
Further Area of Study
Differences of the Media and public perception of ATI right should be considered as the
continuation of what has been discussed in this study. Informational right and other rights user 34
related differences can also provide an exciting study as well as The obstacles of information
right use in the public domain.
REFERENCES
Babbie, E. (2007). The Practice of Social Study. Eleventh Edition. Thomson Wadsworth
Baker, T.L. (1999). Doing Social Study. Third Edition
Bryman, A. (2008). Social Study Methods. Third Edition. Oxford University
Calland, (2002) Access To Information: How Is It Useful And How Is It Used? In
Access to Information – a Key to Democracy. The Carter Center. Edited by
Laura Neuman
Carter, J. (2002). Access to Information – a Key to Democracy. The Carter Center.
Edited by Laura Neuman
Creswell, J.W. (2009). Study Design; Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods
Approaches. Third Edition. Sage Publications
Daniels, C. (2010). Access to Information and the Right to Know – a Namibian
Perspective; Media Ombudsman
Dominick, R. and Wimmer, R. (2011). Mass Media Study: An introduction. Ninth
Edition. Sydney: Thomson Wadsworth
Eveland, W. P and Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Connecting News Media Use with Gaps in
Knowledge and Participation: How They Relate to Knowledge. Education
Media International
35
Fourie, P, J. (2009). Media Studies; Media Content and Media audiences. Volume 3.
Juta Publications
Grabe, M. E., Lang, A., Zhaou, S and Bolls,P.D. (2000). Cognitive Access to Negatively
Arousing News: An Experimental Investigation of the Knowledge Gap,
Communication research
Kanyang’wa, M. (2014). Evaluation Report on the Impact and Outcomes of OSISA
Funded Access to Information Project
Kanyongolo, E. (2012). Obstacles to Access to Information in Malawi.
Malawi Government. (1994). Constitution of the Republic of Malawi Zomba:
Government Printer
McQuail, D. (2005). Mass Communication Theory. Fifth Edition. Sage Publication
Mugenda, O and Mugenda A, G (2003). Study Methods; Quantitative and Qualitalive
Approaches. Nairobi Acts Press
Mulomole, A (2012). Government Secrecy in an information age.
M’ule, E. (2013). So This Is Democracy: State of Media Freedom in Southern Africa
2013. 20th Edition. John Meinert Printing Windhoek Namibia
National Access to Information Policy. (2014)
National Statistical Office of Malawi (Retrieved from http//:www.nsomalawi.mw)
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative Study and Evaluation Methods. Third Edition. Sage
Publication International Educational
36
Price, V. and Zaller, J. (1993). Who Gets the News? Alternative Measures of News
Perceptions and Their Implication for Research, Public Opinion Quarterly 57:
133-64
Reinard, J. (2006). Communication Study Statistics. First Edition. Sage Publication
Roberts, A. (1999). Access to Government Information; an Overview of Issues. Carter
centre publication
Severin, W. & Tankard, J. (2001). Communication Theories. Fifth Edition. Longman
Publication
Tichenor, P. J, Donohue, G. A and Olien, C. N (1970). Mass Media Flow and
Differential Growth in Knowledge, Public Opinion Quarterly 34: Colombia
Press
Weng, S, (2000). Mass Communication Theory and Practice, Taipei: San-ming
37
APPENDIX: STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE
Questionnaire for information as a Basic Human Right
Introduction
I am Nyalifie Mtambalika, a Polytechnic Student doing Bachelor of Arts in Journalism final
year. As a requirement for the award of degree, we are to conduct a study as a fulfilling task to
the department before graduating. Therefore, I am doing a study on the topic ‘Public awareness
of Access to Information (ATI) as a basic right.’ The questionnaire hence seeks to investigate
your knowledge of the right to information. Your participation in this study will assist me to get
correct results.
Be assured that the study will only be used for academic purposes and in coarse of presenting the
results of the study; no names will be included in the questionnaire.
Thank you for participating.
Instructions
Please tick in the boxes provided.
Where more than one option is applicable please tick more than one.
Where additional information is available please use the “others (specify)” space provided.
Explain clearly where possible.
General Information
Current Area of Location (e.g Malirana):
Occupation (e.g a Nurse): …………………………………….
Gender: Male Female
Education level
Primary Secondary Tertiary Other Specify)…………………………….
Age
Below 18 18-28 28-38 Above 38
38
Section: A. Basic Human Rights
1. a). Do you know what the term ‘Human Rights’ means?
Yes No Not Sure
b). If yes, Can you list down examples of human rights you are familiar with. If no proceed to
Question 2
…………………………………
………………………………….
c). Amongst the rights you have list down in (b) above, which one do you consider more
important and explain your answer?
….………………………………………………………………………………………..
2. a). Would you consider information a basic human right?
Yes No Not Sure
(b) If yes, how? If no, go to (c) below.
right to seek and access information right to receive information in a right time
right to demand information using force right to investigate corruption cases
Others (Specify) …………………………………………………………………………..
(c) Why don’t you regard information as a basic right?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Section B: ATI as a right
3. (a) Do you know what Access to Information ATI policy is?
Yes No Not Sure
(b) If option (a) above is Yes or Not Sure, Can you explain what ATI is? If no go to Question 4
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
(c) When did you become aware of it?
Week ago two weeks ago a month ago a year ago
Other (specify) …………………………………………………………………………..
(e) On a scale of one to ten where 1 is the least functional and 10 is the most functional. How
would you rate the use of the right to ATI in Malawi?
39
…………………………………………………………………………………………
4. (a) Do you wish to use ATI as a right
Yes No Not Sure
(b) How will you exercise ATI right?
……………….………………………………………………………………………………… (c)
On a scale of one to ten where on1 is least important and 10 is most important, how can you rate
information as a right?
…………………………………………………………………………………………..
(d) Give reason for your answer in (c) above
………………………………………………………………………………………………
(d) Imagine you are looking for very crucial information from a public officer, and you have
been denied an access to it. What can be your reaction or next move? Justify your answer
………………………………………………………………………………………………
End of Questionnaire!! Thank you for the time and full participation.
APPENDIX B: CHICHEWA QUESIONNAIRE
Mafunso a za kupezaka Kwa Uthenga ngati Ufulu Wa Chibadwidwe
Chiyambi
Dzina langa ndi Nyalifie Mtambalika, wophunzila wa sukulu ya ukachenjede ya Polytechnic, wa
utolankhani chaka chomaliza. Ngati chokwanilitsa kumaliza maphunziro a ukachenjede,
timayenera kupanga kafukufuku yemwe amatipatsa malikisi. Ineyo kafukufuku wanga mutu
wake ndi “Kupezeka kwa uthenga ngati ufulu wa chibadwidwe.” Cholinga cha mafunsowa ndi
kufufuza ngati inu mukudziwako za ufuluwu. Mayankho anu adzandithandiza kupeza zotsatira
zoyenela.
Mukutsimikizilidwa kuti kafukufukuyu adzagwiritsidwa pa nthito ya mkalasi yokha ndipo maina
anu sadzalembedwamo mkafukufukuyu.
Zikomo kwambiri potenga nawo mbali pa kafukufukuyu.
Malangizo40
Chonde chongani mu kabokosiko.
Ngati pali mayankho awiri, chongani monga mungathere.
Ngati mwafuna kuonjezera lembani pa Zina.
Fotokozani momveka bwino pomwe pafunikila kutero.
General Information
Komwe mumakhala (monga Malirana) :…………………………………
Ntchito yanu (monga namwino) : …………………………………….
Chilengedwe: Mwamuna Mkazi
Malire a maphunzilo
Pulayimale Sekondaley Ukachenjede Zina(Fotokozani)………………………….
Zaka
Zochepera 18 18 mpaka 28 28 mpaka 38 zopitilira 38
Chigawo Choyamba: Ufulu Wa Chibadwidwe
1a). Mumadziwa tanthauzo la Ufulu wa chibadwidwe?
Eya Ayi Mwina
b). Ngati mumadziwa,tchulani zitsanzo za Ufulu wa chibadwidwe zomwe mukudziwa. Ngati
simukudziwa pitani ku funso 2
…………………………………
…………………………………
c). Pa zitsanzo za Ufulu mwatchulazo, ndi Ufulu uti omwe mumawuona kuti ndi ofunikila
kwambiri? Fotokozani yankho lanu.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
2a). kodi mumatenga uthenga ngati umodzi mwa maufulu a chibadwidwe?
Eya Ayi Mwina
(b) Ngati yankho lanu ndi eya, ufuluwo mumaudziwa bwanji? Ngati mwayankha ayi, pitani ku
funso (c) munsimu.
Ufulu ofufuza ndi kudziwa nkhani Ufulu olandira uthenga mu nthawi yake
ufuliu odziwa nkhani pogwiritsa ntchito mphamvu Ufulu ofufuza nkhani za katangale
Zina(Fotokozani) …………………………………………………………………………..
41
(c) Chifukwa chani simungatenge uthenga ngati Ufulu wa chibadwidwe?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
Gawo Lachiwiri: Ufulu Opeza Ma Uthenga
3(a) Kodi mukudziwa za lamulo la kufikira kwa uthenga ?
Eya Ayi Mwina
(b)Ngati yankho lanu mu (a) ndi eya kapena mwina, fotokozani kuti kufikira kwa uthenga ndi
chiyani. Ngati yankho lanu ndi ayi, pitani ku funso lachisanu (5)
…………………………………………………………………………………………
(c) munazindikira liti za lamuloli?
Sabata lapitali Sabata ziwiri zapitazi mwezi umodzi wapitawu chaka chimodzi
chapitacho
Zina (fotokozani) …………………………………………………………………………..
(d) Pamuyeso wa 1 mpaka 10 pamene 1 ndi kufunika kochepa ndi 10 kufunika kwambiri.
Mungayese bwanji kagwiritsidwe ntchito ka Ufuluwu ku Malawi kuno?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
4 (a) Mungafune kugwiritsa ntchito Ufulu opeza ma uthenga
Eya Ayi Mwina
(b) Muzawugwiritsa ntchito bwanji ufuluwu?
…………………………………………………………………………………………….
(c) Pamuyeso wa 1 mpaka 10 pamene 1 ndi kufunika kochepa ndi 10 kufunika kwambiri.
Mungayese bwanji Ufulu opeza uthenga?
…………………………………………………………………………………………..
(d) Pelekani chifukwa cha yankho lanu mu (c) m’mwambamo
………………………………………………………………………………………………
(e) taganizani mukufunafuna uthenga ofunikila kwambiri kwa ogwira ntchito m’boma ndipo
mwakanizidwa uthengawu. Kodi inu mungatani? Pelekani chifukwa cha zomwe mungapangezo.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
Mathero a mafunso. Zikomo kamba kamayankho anu.
Sayinani……………………………………………
42
1
