29 September 2025 –

Sunlight is the best disinfectant. The right to access information held by State bodies is crucial for civil society organizations, the media, academia, and citizens to understand government decision-making, and who influences it, to monitor the use of public funds, to identify potential corruption risks and cases, and push for adequate transparency in government. Effective access to information is crucial for holding those in power accountable. It is a precondition for meaningful public engagement in decision-making, including efforts to strengthen anti-corruption measures.

The Global Right to Information Rating, an assessment of access to information legislation worldwide, shows that 140 countries currently have national laws in place. However, many of them have crucial weaknesses, and in many countries around the world, civil society does not have effective access to information, particularly if this information is to tackle corruption.

On the occasion of the International Day for Universal Access to Information, the Coalition calls on States to:

• put in place and implement laws that ensure effective and prompt access to information,
• which reflect international standards,
• including by being broad in their scope of coverage,
• incorporating user-friendly procedures for making and responding to requests for information,
• having clear and narrow regimes of exceptions,
• providing for effective and independent administrative oversight bodies,
• instituting sanctions for wilful obstruction of access and protections for good faith disclosures, and
• putting in place strong frameworks for the automatic online disclosure of documents, data and other information relevant to preventing and identifying forms of corruption.

Regional perspectives – Advances and setback related to access information

Despite uneven enforcement, virtually all Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) countries now have access-to-information (ATI) laws, with new statutes in Costa Rica (Oct. 2024) and Cuba (July 2024); Bolivia advanced a bill but it was later shelved.
However, the challenges to implementation remain significant, one of which is the lack of data to assess progress in transparency: 43% of countries with access to information laws do not record data on denied requests. Civil society mapping also records that most countries maintain ATI frameworks, even as oversight independence has been weakened in places and exceptions expanded. Costa Rica’s law was hailed as overdue, but it created no independent oversight body; before its passage, the Constitutional Chamber issued 459 orders in 2024 to force disclosure—evidence of structural non-compliance. By contrast, Mexico eliminated its independent information authority (INAI) in December 2024, shifting control to the executive—widely viewed as a major regression.

Regionally, exceptions are being applied broadly (e.g., “national security,” “priority projects,” “state of emergency”, “crisis conditions” or “preparatory documents”), with Honduras classifying UN anti-corruption talks as confidential, and Argentina narrowing what counts as “public information”–moves that shrink practical access even where laws exist. Each of these measures expand secrecy and undermines the spirit of access to information laws in the region.

These trends clash with binding regional standards. The Inter-American Court has held since Claude Reyes v. Chile (2006) that access to State-held information is protected under Article 13 of the American Convention; IACHR/Special Rapporteurship guidance likewise requires narrow, necessary and proportionate restrictions and effective oversight. In 2024–2025, the Rapporteurship reiterated recommendations on ATI, digital secrecy and safeguards. In short, UNCAC Article 13’s participation mandate and inter-American jurisprudence converge: ATI is a cornerstone of prevention and accountability. For LAC civil society, that means timely, usable data on procurement, beneficial ownership, budgeting and emergency contracting—the evidentiary backbone for monitoring corruption, asset recovery, and rights-based remedies for victims. Where overbroad exceptions, privacy/security pretexts, and non-enforcement prevail, ATI remains a right on paper rather than a tool in practice. 

Without strong independent oversight or penalties for non-compliance, the right to know is jeopardized. This means that civil society organizations and journalists must continually resort to appeals, litigation, and public pressure to obtain crucial data – a reality that highlights the ongoing struggle to turn legal rights into real access to information. Latin America and the Caribbean face high levels of transnational corruption, impunity, and violence against those who investigate; access to information is key to breaking opacity and strengthening democracy. Commemorating this international day is a reminder that transparency is a right, not a favor.

Read Members’ stories

With the adoption of Austria’s Freedom of Information Act in January 2024, by now all countries in Europe have passed legislation to guarantee public access to information (ATI). The right to information is even recognized as a fundamental right in the European Union (EU), stemming from the broader fundamental right to freedom of expression, and enshrined in the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights (Article 11). However, transitioning from a culture of secrecy to an “open by default” practice of sharing information is a long process that cannot be taken for granted and citizens face challenges in accessing government-held information across the region. A study of access to information frameworks in several European countries, coordinated by Access Info Europe, revealed that ATI laws adopted in the last decade tend to be stronger than older laws, and that Eastern and Central Europe (Ukraine, Moldova, Croatia, Hungary, Georgia) generally has stronger frameworks. 

A key event of the past decade was the entry into force in 2020 of the Convention on Access to Official Documents (Tromsø Convention), the first international treaty to recognise a general right of access to information held by public authorities. It has been ratified by 17 countries – a number still far from the 46 member states of its guardian body, the Council of Europe. Another important platform for European transparency reformers, in and outside government, has been the Open Government Partnership. European countries have made a total of 137 commitments related to the right to information since 2012, although the number is slightly declining.

Despite relatively strong frameworks, an implementation gap is a general trend across the region and some setbacks have been noted. Exceptions in the laws, privacy and security concerns, and lack of enforcement, including of decisions taken by Transparency bodies to provide requested information, deeply undermine the exercise of this right in practice. In the European Union, civil society has noted undue delays and unmotivated rejections concerning EU documents, as well as weaknesses in certain areas such as a lack of transparency regarding environmental information. A European Court of Justice ruling in 2022 led several countries to suspend unrestricted public access to the registers of beneficial owners of companies, arguing it was a violation of fundamental rights to privacy and personal data protection. Two crucial and urgent challenges affecting access to information in Europe today are the need to defend media freedom – protect journalists and civil society organizations who face threats, intimidation, and attacks for their work – and the need to address disinformation – foster a rich and pluralistic public debate, while countering manipulative narratives that fuel hostility and polarization.

Therefore, the role of civil society organizations in protecting, making use of and expanding access to information is as important as ever, both as watchdogs and as partners. For example, two strategic litigations to defend the right of access to documents at the European Union level were submitted by civil society (Case T-146/25 and  Case T-507/25). In June 2025, civil society organizations created the first NGO Day at the International Conference on Information Commissioners (ICIC) in Berlin and adopted the CSO Declaration on the Right to Information and Environmental Justice.

Read Members’ stories

Africa has made legal progress on the right to access public information over the last decade, with 29 states now having ATI laws compared to only a handful before 2013. However, when compared to progress in the rest of the world, Africa’s performance highlights deep shortcomings. Globally, more than 135 countries have specific ATI laws, making Africa one of the regions with the slowest uptake. Implementation lags even further behind global peers: while countries in Latin America and Europe have resourced oversight commissions, digital open-data platforms, and measurable impacts on accountability, many African states continue to struggle with enforcement, political resistance, and weak institutions. Digital threats, especially internet shutdowns, remain uniquely acute in Africa, repeatedly undermining public access to information during elections and crises.

This year’s theme for the International Day for Universal Access to Information (IDUAI):
‘Ensuring Access to Environmental Information in the Digital Age’ is highly relevant for Africa, the region most vulnerable to climate shocks and extractive pressures. Communities facing displacement, pollution, or biodiversity loss often lack timely data on environmental impacts. Integrating environmental obligations into ATI frameworks is critical for resilience, sustainable development, and protecting marginalised communities.
In 2024, the AU Executive Council mandated a review of the 2013 Model Law on Access to Information Law for Africa to align it with the 2019 Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information in Africa (the 2019 Declaration). The ACHPR has since initiated a continental study and consultations across 2024–2025, engaging states and civil society and technical partners on the margins of various fora, including the upcoming Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa (FIFAFRICA) and IDUAI. These consultations aim to embed environmental information, strengthen protections against digital restrictions, and modernise ATI standards to respond to the modern needs of the African continent.

While most countries in the region have ATI laws, regulations, or pending initiatives, the practical ability of people to obtain information remains constrained. Restrictions on the internet and social media in India, Bangladesh, and Nepal, as well as heightened surveillance and communication blackouts in Myanmar, have directly limited citizens’ access to information (link, link, link, link). These measures, coupled with growing state and private capture of media in countries such as China and Vietnam, narrow the channels through which information can be freely shared and accessed.

Legislative reform progress on ATI in the region continues, with countries such as Mongolia and Timor-Leste yet to adopt legislative measures on ATI. The Open Government Partnership’s (OGP) commitment tracker records 33 ATI-related commitments from 10 Asia-Pacific member states. Civil society and activists in Papua New Guinea have been advocating for an ATI legislation since their first National Action Plan in 2018, though the framework is still pending. At the same time, the implementation of existing ATI frameworks is a significant obstacle. In Sri Lanka and Pakistan, members in our network have expressed concerns about delays in appointing members to information commissions which weakens effective oversight, while research in Nepal highlights structural barriers that hinder citizens from exercising their rights. These setbacks illustrate that while legal recognition of ATI is slowly advancing, meaningful implementation and accountability mechanisms lag behind. Access to information is a key anti-corruption tool, helping to lift the veil of secrecy around publicly financed projects, procurement processes, decision-making by public officials, and more. In the Asia-Pacific, ATI efforts are increasingly intersecting with campaigns for greater transparency in procurement data, beneficial ownership registers, and the declaration of assets and liabilities. Members of the Asia-Pacific regional network of the UNCAC Coalition have been increasingly focusing on enhancing both proactive and reactive disclosure of information by the public authorities (link, p. 45, link, link) in their countries, with efforts to ensure the institutional structure of information commissions stay effective and efficient.

Over the past year in the South West Africa and North Africa region, civil society observers have seen incremental gains in legal recognition of the right to information, alongside persistent structural setbacks that continue to limit its real-world impact.

Some countries have proposed or amended Right to Information legislation: for instance, Jordan’s 2024 amendments seek to mandate more proactive disclosure and extend rights to non-citizens, though civil society has flagged problematic restrictions tied to declaring the purpose of requests. In several states, draft bills or reform efforts are under discussion (e.g. in Iraq), signaling momentum among reformist policymakers. At the same time, the region’s entrenched secrecy culture, weak implementation of existing laws, and broad exception clauses (especially around “national security” and “public order”) continue to undermine transparency.

However, there have also been notable regressions that heighten risks for requesters and erode accountability. Digital suppression and surveillance are intensifying: in Jordan, for example, dozens of journalists, lawyers, and rights advocates have reportedly been targeted with NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware. Meanwhile, internet shutdowns have been used as blunt tools to block access to information during crises, demonstrating that states in SWANA are willing to curtail not just information flows, but the very digital space in which requests and disclosures take place. Media freedoms continue to be under increasing pressure, with governments censoring, prosecuting, or otherwise intimidating journalists. In sum, while incremental legal reforms offer hope, the real challenge remains ensuring that these rights are protected in practice, and that citizens can safely claim them in a worsening digital environment.