The Right to Information Bill 2009 came under intense scrutiny on Monday in Accra, when Parliament’s joint Committee on Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, and Communications brought its contents up for discussions. The Bill, according to the chairman of the joint committee, would be in fulfillment of the fundamental human rights as guaranteed under the 1992 Constitution. Mr Twumasi Appiah, who is also the Member of Parliament for Sene, said the Bill would make access to information more convenient and easy, as well as ensuring transparency in governance. More importantly, Mr Appiah acknowledged the impact of the Bill in the nation’s quest to fight corruption. He added that corruption would be reduced to the barest minimum, because public and civil servants would be more careful in their dealings, having at the back of their minds that they would be made more accountable to the public. However, notwithstanding the principles and ideas of the Bill, several sections and subsections of the Bill were cited by the handful participants, at the National Theatre, that if care was not taken, the Bill would become a white elephant or, worse still, disadvantaged the very persons it intended to assist. Concerns raised at the public hearing included the cost of accessing information, the timeline in one having his request granted, exemption of private sector thus not binding on them to divulge their information, the format information would be provided. Prof. Kwame Karikari, Executive Director of Media Foundation for West African, said the period between when a request is submitted and when it is granted, as stipulated by the Bill is too labourious. He said whiles in countries like Liberia and Nigeria one’s request must be granted wihtin 7 and 30 days respectively, in the case of Ghana, it is 158 days. He suggested that a request should be granted in less than 40 days to avoid “subversion” of the law. A renowned lawyer on media law, Akoto Ampaw, was not enthused about the scope of exemption under the Bill, saying the Bill was too restrictive to the public. He recommended that, except issues bothering on national security, the Bill should expunge or relax some sections on exemptions. Generally, he suggested modification to Sections 6, 10, 28 of the Bill. Mohammed Amin Adams also suggested that inasmuch as the Bill criminalise the release of classified information, information officers who fail to provide information they ought to should be made to face summary conviction. Government’s institutions and agencies should be obliged to publish sections of the Bill which fall under their domain, Leslie Tettey of Ghana National Education Campaign Coalition proposed. A representative of the Trade Union Congress wanted the Bill to be binding on private companies in the exploratory industry – whose businesses directly impact on natural resources – to divulge information about their dealings. Steve Manteaw of ISODEC called for an Independent Commission to supervise the implementation of the Bill to insulate it from political manipulation. Affail Monnie of the Ghana Journalist Association was of the view that the process of accessing information should be decentralized. He also feared the Bill would be welcomed with a partisan approach as we live in polarised country. Classified information under the Bill would only be declassified after 25 years. The Bill, as it stands now, does not allow disclosure of privilege information, especially between a lawyer and cline, doctor and patient and couples.