‘Law of Keeping Your Trap Shut’

It’s pretty darn hard to write a funny column these days. There’s so little to laugh about. But let us try.
There was this encouraging story in the news last week that said the Right to Information Act will be a reality soon. This groundbreaking announcement is decidedly at odds with the status quo in Sri Lanka where the only law that governs information — and the public’s right to — it is the Law of Keeping Your Trap Shut. And, by god, that is one solid piece of legislation.
Journalists probing government misdeeds - regardless of the party in power - quickly discover that information is the one thing nobody will give you. Take that phone call I made the week before to the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission. I wanted to know what measures the government was taking to monitor the internet. Nothing about any misdeeds; just straightforward questions about what the TRC had been advised to, if at all, look out for in terms of internet activity.
During 30 minutes of phone calls, I became acquainted with the operator, the public relations officer, Mr Farook, Mr Jayaweera and Mr Ranatunga. I might also have become acquainted with Mr Gunananda had he been in office.
What I didn’t get acquainted with was the information I sought. And this happens so often that when an announcement is suddenly made about a ‘Right to Information Act’ becoming ‘reality’ ‘soon’ one cannot help but burst out laughing. Hah, there you go... something to laugh about.
Try getting spending accounts from the ministry of foreign affairs for the multi-million rupee trips that Rohitha Bogollagama makes to all parts of the world on first class travel accompanied (in most cases) by members of his family. It is legitimate public information - voters have a right to know how their ministers are spending tax money and what results such disbursements bring the country. You will never get those documents.
Try obtaining documented proof about the activities of Mihin Air or other high-expenditure government ventures that have proved a complete, if not absolute, waste of public money. Try getting President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s declaration of assets which was supposedly reposed with the mercurial Commissioner of Elections Dayananda Dissanayake before the last election. Requests for copies have gone unanswered despite existing legislation decreeing that members of the public may access such documents if they wish to do so.

Misuse of public property

Try getting information from official sources about the misuse of public property at the last election. Ask, for instance, the head of a department the details of how many vehicles, how many members of his staff and how much fuel was used in electioneering on behalf of the government. He won’t tell you. What’s more, he will cite the Law of Keeping Your Trap Shut - also known as the Official Secrets Act. And that other one called the Establishments Code (which nobly aspires to keep public officials from divulging any information to the public).
Try getting information about how many presidential commissions of inquiry there have been over the years, how much was spent on them, where their reports are and what they said. You won’t get it. If crimes were committed, people have the right to know but that is not how Sri Lanka works. Here we operate on the principle that what the public doesn’t know won’t hurt them.
Try getting information about tenders, about government contracts, about statistics and data related to expensive projects. Very, very difficult. Try getting information about how many liquor licences have been issued and how many of those that own such licences are either in parliament or have contacts/friends/relatives in parliament. You might manage but only if you succeed in cornering an official sneak who is either conscientious enough or dissatisfied enough to reveal the facts on the pledge that his identity will never be revealed.
The only way to get sensitive - but publicly relevant - information in Sri Lanka is to get somebody to snitch or to have your questions asked in parliament through a member of parliament. It should not be so.
In the case of the former, heaven forbid that anybody should get caught in the blasphemous act of leaking information. Remember the case of S Rannuge, the former secretary to the ministry of export development and international trade? He was forced to retire last year after he told media that Sri Lanka may not secure an extension of the GSP Plus trade incentive from the European Union.
Rannuge later told me: “I have always given a full picture when asked for information about ministry matters. I have nothing to hide. I told them (journalists) that we are still under investigation, that the panel had sent their report and their comments were very adverse. Secretaries are allowed to share activities of the ministry with the press and I still don’t believe I made an oversight.”
Sigh. Wrong answer, obviously. Wrong answer.