The National Commission for Mass Literacy, Adult andNon-Formal Education (NMEC) has joined dozens of other public institutions in
the “Freedom of Information (FOI) Hall of Shame” as Media Rights Agenda (MRA)accused it of failing to comply with virtually all its duties and obligations
under the FOI Act, reports ITRealms.
Disclosing the induction of NMEC into the FOI Hall of Shame
in Lagos on Monday, MRA’s Programme Manager for Freedom of Information, Mr
Ridwan Sulaimon, in a press statement made available to ITRealms, said the attitude of the
Commission towards the FOI Act was illogical for an institution whose primary
mandate is “the eradication of illiteracy for national development” and whose
activities and spheres of operation cut across the entire social strata.
“It should be obvious to the management of NMEC
that the institution cannot hope to succeed in its task of combating the
problems of illiteracy and ignorance within its client population if it does
not support and implement a framework such as the FOI Act, which is designed to
enhance the free flow of information and to make information freely available
to citizens,” he said
NMEC is a statutory Federal Government parastatal charged
with the ‘responsibility of making literate all those who for one reason or the
other did not or cannot benefit from the formal school system. These include
out-of-school youths, children in the street, women in purdah, victims of
teenage motherhood (VVF), Nomadic illiterate people, Almajiris and other
migrant fishing folks.’
Noting that since its establishment in 1990, NMEC has
received funding from different sources including from the federation budget
and local governments, Mr. Sulaimon contended that the institution has a burden
of accountability which will be easily discharged if it implements its
commitments under the FOI Act.
According to him, “Unfortunately, in the last seven years
since the enactment of the FOI Act, NMEC has not submitted any annual
implementation report to the Attorney General of the Federation, as it is
required to do by Section 29 of the Act; and there is no indication whatsoever
that the organisation has designated an officer to whom requests for
information may be sent, as required by the FOI Act and the Implementation
Guidelines for the Act issued by the Attorney-General.”
He noted that as a direct result of the institution’s
failure to submit its annual implementation reports for the past seven years
and to make such reports public in utter disregard for the Law, there is no
information available anywhere about the institution’s handling of its
obligations under the FOI Act, especially its level of responsiveness to
requests for information from members of the public.”
Ayo Midele/GEE
No comments:
Post a Comment