Right to information policy implementation in Nepal

Abstract

Although Nepal introduced right to information (RTI) as a fundamental right in the constitution in 1990, it took 17 years for legal arrangements to be made. Right to Information Act (RTIA) enacted in 2007 to ensure citizens' right to obtain information on any issue pertaining to public bodies. It has been one and a half decades since Nepal saw the RTI regime. Implementation of public policies has become an issue of enormous concern in many developing countries including Nepal. Now it attracts the interest of research as to how RTI policy is implemented. The degree of RTI policy implementation is the main research question of this study. Nepal has emphasized open government through the implementation of RTI since 1990. There is a wider attention of all government and non-government institutions, which are the prime focus for disseminating information for the open government as demanded by citizens. The study uses the Van Meter and Van Horn model to measure the degree of RTI policy implementation, which includes policy formation, policy standards and objectives, resources, characteristics of implementing agencies, inter-organizational communication and enforcement activities, economic, social and political conditions, disposition of implementers, and performance. Likewise, indicators —confidence, professional image, and performance — for institutional trust are considered to test existing institutional Nepali mechanism for implementing RTI policy. The study employs a mixed research (Quan-qual) approach. It is based on an explanatory approach, which identifies the cause-and-effect relationship of the policy implementation. For the quantitative analysis, a survey questionnaire filled up by 315 out of 2153 journalists systematically through an online survey. After quantitative analysis, key informant interviews carried out for the analysis of this study. The study identifies 15 indicators for the analysis of RTI implementation which is the dependent variable. These indicators include proactive disclosure of information, classification of information, access to information, training and orientation, appointment of Information Officer, and other provisions of RTIA. For the policy implementation mechanism, this study analyses policy standards, resources, inter-organizational coordination and communication, characteristics of implementing agencies, and disposition of implementers for RTI policy implementation as independent variables. Likewise, institutional trust is the second independent variable responsible for RTI implementation, in this study, the relationship between institutional trust and RTI policy implementation is examined. Public institutions' trust, their professionalism, and the behavioral pattern of civil servants are sub-variables of the institutional trust. The study finds that the RTIA is not implemented properly in public organizations, and the range of indicators has a wide range, with a standard deviation of 1.2 on the Likert scale of 1 to 4. The fluctuation of these indicators is caused by hidden factors such as legal controversies, an apathetic culture of bureaucrats, frequent transfer of civil servants, and lack of punishment to the defaulter. Among variables for the mechanism, policy standards of the public institution influence RTI policy implementation at significant level. The availability of resources is found as crucial factor for RTI. Although policy clarity, resource availability, and organizational communication are found at a significant level whereas the characteristics of implementing agencies and the cognition of implementers are creating a hurdle to RTIA implementation effectively. Similarly, institutional trust is correlated to RTI implementation. Among the variables for institutional trust, confidence in the public institution has a significant role in RTIA implementation whereas confidence in media-related institution stands positive but not significant. Likewise, the performance-based trust in civil service has also positive but not to a significant level for RTI. On the flip side, the professional trust of public servants as well as journalists has negative influence. RTIA implementation is not found effective as expected due to lack of professional trust among the public servants. In the accumulation of both mechanism and institutional related variables, RTIA implementation is not effective due to cognition of implementers- civil servants, and the professional image of both civil servants and journalists cause negative influence. In this study professional trust and civil service trust find below the expected level, which is creating hurdles for RTIA implementation even though people have trust in the public institutions. The study concludes that the whole phenomenon of RTIA policy implementation is circumscribed by the authoritarianism of office bearers.