Life after death: An update on the Freedom of Information campaign

A Senate hearing was recently held to probe on how the media behaved during the recent hostage fiasco. Media has received flaks from all directions for their blow- by- blow account of the event which said to have contributed to the tragedy. And because some media personalities and individuals justified their coverage as an exercise of their duty to provide the public with information consistent with the people's right to know, the Freedom of Information bill was dragged in the midst of the heated debates.

According to Senator Gringo Honasan, Senate Committee on Public Information, the Senate hearing held last 14 September 2010 was intended to discuss the Freedom of Information bill, among others. Although the FOI bill was not discussed during the session, the bill has been repeatedly mentioned outside the Senate halls especially during the IIRC investigation. On the other side of the fence was the argument that the incident clearly spelled out the limits of the people’s right to know. Even if this seeming tension did not substantially affect the advocacy since it did not result in the revision of any provision it certainly brought the bill back in the circulation.

When the media conveniently used the right to information as a shield against public’s and government official’s slur, IIRC member, Teresita Ang See tore the screen by saying that life is more important than the people’s right to know. ABC 5 News and Current Affairs head, Ms. Luchi Cruz- Valdes sounded off the same when she said in the Senate hearing that they draw the line in their full blast coverage when lives are at stake. The discourse then became life versus right to information which I find reasonable. I think that in general, the value of anything diminishes when it becomes a matter of life and death.

But if one would disentangle freedom of information from the hostage fiasco, the recent discourse would give rise to another reality that sometimes freedom of information, not only affects life but is life itself. In many cases, information breathes life to a dying institution, in the most abstract terms and, survival from physical death in the most practical one.

This has been very well summarized by Ms. Aruna Roy, a Ramon Magsaysay Awardee for Public Service and a staunch advocate of Freedom of Information in India when she said that right to information is right to life. The case of Sumilao farmers, for instance, who were denied of information about the land they claim resulted in a defeat which was tantamount to lost of their main source of food and livelihood.

This assertion is vital in keeping the advocacy alive especially after the 14^th Congress killed the bill. The lifeblood of a hardly hit, almost suicidal advocacy has been the fact that indeed there is life after death. This hope is embraced even if death has visited twice when the President refused to mention the bill as his priority during his State of the Nation Address.

Moving on, the Right to Know. Right Now! Campaign is gearing up for the 15^th Congress. A series of planning has been held and a number of activities and strategies were set.