Our research has found a similar picture with respect to use of access to information laws: journalists need to strengthen their ability to obtain information held by public bodies if they are to hold those bodies accountable. One of the potentially most powerful tools available to journalists are the access to information laws which now exist in most countries in Europe, many of them recently adopted and still significantly under-used by the media.

In particular the survey found that:

• Many journalists in Europe do not generally possess knowledge on the rules for access to European Union documents.

• Participants across the countries of Europe highlighted the need for toolkits and resources which would provide them with a functioning knowledge of national laws on access to information, international standards and best practices.

• We came to know as a result of the survey that the number of journalists using access to information law in their profession across Europe is very low; and among those journalists, investigative journalists are those who are most likely to utilize this tool.

• The main reasons given by the journalists for not using access to information law include: no certainty of getting information; the passive response of public agencies (administrative silence); and long time frames stipulated by the law for receiving information [3 or 4 weeks is long in journalistic terms] and for appeals; the cost and time involved in taking appeals.

• The survey also revealed that generally there is no effective cooperation between organizations working for freedom of information and media organisation in the majority of the countries surveyed. Similarly, there is no mechanism to provide guidance or knowledge to journalists on filing information request or on how to appeal against the decisions of public bodies.

• Journalists do know have the necessary knowledge and/or language skills to file requests in other countries. Many have never even considered filing formal request at the European Union level.

Although access to information would provide journalists with an instrument to access primary information sources in a legal way many journalists still rely on inside contacts and leaked documents. Having contacts is an essential part of the work of a professional journalist, but much information held by public bodies should be available to the media without having to rely on inside channels. Journalists should be provided with basic information about how a public body is taking decisions or implementing policies. This frees up the journalists to use contacts for getting more in-depth information and analysis.

Although journalists will have to wait for a few days to receive the answers to the information requests, in the long term journalists will have better quality information and access to raw data rather than the spin put on government information by public relations departments. For journalists, better information means better stories, which helps them advance their professional careers. For media outlets it means more scoops which in turn increases the levels of sales and readership or the numbers of listening or viewing audiences, all of which are of benefit to the survival and impact of media outlets.

In part the problem of low use of the law is due to poor compliance by public bodies. There is a vicious circle where low levels of responsiveness to information requests by public authorities results in scepticism about the value of filing requests in the first place on the part of journalists and their bosses, the editors and media owners. The lack of demand in turn reinforces lack of reform of information management systems and poor compliance with the law.

At the same time, many public bodies are not complying with the obligations under the national access to information laws to publish basic information proactively. This means that journalists have either to rely on contacts and sources to get information or to file access to information requests and to wait for a period of time before receiving an answer, even when the information is relatively basic such as a financial spending report or a copy of information relating to a public procurement process which by law should be in the public domain. Every-day decisions which affect local citizens are often not made public in a timely manner. Journalists need to know what the law says about proactive publication and by reporting on failures to comply with the legal provisions they can increase the pressure on the public bodies to respect the law and to become more transparent.

Access Info has found that in a few countries, however, journalists have been very active in making use of the access to information laws and this has contributed to improved implementation of the laws, faster response times, and better proactive publication of information. A prime example is the UK where the Freedom of Information Act (which entered into force on 1 January 2005) is regularly used by journalists and stories appear in the media on a daily basis which include the reference “according to documents obtained using the Freedom of Information Act...”. [1]

In the new democracies, our research has identified two countries where close collaboration by access to information activists with journalists has lead to increased use of the access to information for media research. These countries are Hungary (FOI law of 1992 – the first in Eastern Europe) and Bulgaria (Access to Information law of 2000) where media not only make active use of their right to request government-held information but also go to court to defend the right when information is not provided, with legal support provided by the lawyers working with the access to information organisation. As a result journalists have been successful in uncovering issues that include exposure of local corruption and misuse of European Union funds.

Access Info staff have worked in close collaboration with the civil society organisations in both Hungary and Bulgaria whose work was responsible for this success. Since the year 2000 our staff members have participated directly in trainings of journalists and in provision of legal advice and court representation of the journalists. This experience has contributed to the design of this project.

[1] See Campaign to Freedom of Information