You have several options: a) You refuse to entertain the person and in a polite way refuse to respond citing the confidentiality of the information. No one in the organization is authorized to disclose such information (by the way, I am wondering if this option would work if the person who knocks on your office door is a direct beneficiary of your project).
b) Although unprepared and somehow surprised by the audacity of the information seeker, you decide to face “interrogation” and try to provide some answers that might satisfy the questioner.
The second option is a better way to deal with this kind of situation. Soon, the above-mentioned scenario could be a reality and all those working in the sector should embrace this development in a positive way as it can be a “game changer’ when it comes to increasing accountability in the development sector among non-state actors, regardless of their international and national status.
By the way, there is also an option c. This is a situation where one officer of your organization (not necessarily a communication officer) has a clear responsibility to deal with such requests related to Right to Information (RTI). Indeed the person at the door might simply point out his undeniable right to information.
Why non-state actors should be more forthcoming with info on their work.
While RTI might not, at least for the moment, be used to garner information from multilateral and bilateral external development partners like UN agencies and different governmental aid agencies, each of us working for a national or international organization will eventually have to deal with more and more citizens demanding information about our work.
We should all welcome this new chance which offers an opportunity for I/NGO sector to better explain their work, reducing the “room” for generic negative comments on the way the non-state actors are achieving their goals and missions. Thus RTI offers a real chance to close the gap between development agents, stakeholders and beneficiaries, bringing more clarity and transparency in the sector.
RTI can be a tool for enhanced accountability framework where the word accountability simply stands for a recognized common responsibility to deliver in the best and most efficient way and according to the concept of value for money. RTI can also be seen as life insurance for development organizations in the sense that, if taken positively, it offers a wider platform to showcase the value and the impact of the work carried out thus far.
Therefore, like I said, application of RTI in development sector could be a “game changer” in that it provides a legal framework that regulates what can and what cannot be asked, ensuring that concerns related to privacy (for example on issue of salaries) can be properly addressed. There is great thirst for such sensitive information among the public and the mass media, and we should be prepared to understand and learn to deal with these requests.
Let’s be clear: there are no limits to the level of openness and transparency of a not-for-profit organization, and there is no prohibition on going that extra mile while releasing more so-called confidential data. In USA, Charity Navigator, which measures effectiveness and efficiency of American not-for-profits, publishes and compares many variables, including salary of top managers of the organization under scrutiny. The better you are, the more effective you are, the more credit and recognition you receive. It can even convince potential donors to invest in your projects.
Of course we are not in the US and the level of the sector’s maturity is far short when compared to American standards but it will be naïve, and unfair, to assume the citizenry or beneficiaries won’t be able to understand the provided information.
The bottom line is that RTI should be seen as a tool that can help non-state actors improve their performance and if these performances are good, if the change you are promoting is tangible, increased openness is nothing to worry about. If you do a good job, if your action is a real catalyst for change, if the lives of beneficiaries are really transformed, there is nothing to worry about.
But RTI should not be seen as a stand-alone piece of legislation. It’s just a legal framework that can help development organizations function more effectively and with a high level of accountability. Thus the request for more information should be seen within the monitoring and evaluation framework. By being able to listen to feedback and suggestions, development organizations can not only contribute to increasing community ownership but also in helping the organizations improve their standards.
Fortunately in a sea of criticism against I/NGOs, there are many good practices in terms of transparency and accountability like social audit, public audits, public hearings, score keeping and client-satisfaction surveys. There are also many methodologies and modalities to assess the work of non-state development actors. It’s important to understand that all these efforts are geared towards achieving the same overarching objective: making development and aid more effective. Equally importantly, these efforts contribute directly to the implementation of RTI principles.
RTI can be implemented not only in a passive way (by offering information on request), but in multiple ways and forms through more proactive measures. Non-state developing organizations, both national and international, need not wait for someone to come knock on their doors to disseminate information about their projects by publicizing simple, short and comprehensive summary of their work. The same could be done at project level with publication of information outside the local field offices, by preparation of newsletter in local languages or even with use of mass media tools.
There are many ways to disseminate important information that can be used by the beneficiaries to better understand the work of development agencies. But we should also understand that Right to Information is not the panacea, but just a platform to improve organizational standards. It should be embraced without hesitation and fear.
The writer is involved with many social ventures in Nepal
simogal2000@yahoo.ca
Related story
Bipul and Laure in the Nepali rendition of Tuborg’s ‘Stay Open’
