How effective is the right to access information in Sub-Saharan Africa? Civil society organizations, journalists and communities use access to information to scrutinize public expenditure, procurement, infrastructure projects and service delivery. However, the existence of a right to information law does not necessarily mean that people can obtain the information they need, when they need it, or in a form they can meaningfully use.
The varying levels of implementation of this right in practice was the topic of discussion of the 21st Sub-Saharan Africa Regional Meeting held on 24 September 2026 – ahead of this year’s International Right to Know Day on 28 September – with topic experts sharing insights into regional developments in access to information, and specific country examples from Senegal, Uganda and Nigeria.
Advancing ATI legislation globally
At the global level, access to information is recognized as a cornerstone of transparent, accountable and participatory governance. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) reports that 141 UN member states have adopted constitutional, statutory and policy guarantees for access to information. The Centre for Law and Democracy’s Right to Information (RTI) Rating provides another measure of progress, assessing the strength of national legal frameworks against 61 indicators, with a maximum score of 150, these cover the scope of the right, requesting procedures, exceptions and refusals, appeals and protections. For Sub-Saharan Africa, scores range from 50 to 128 out of 150, with 2 countries considered among the top 10 while one at the bottom 10, indicating a level of variation in the strength of national access to information frameworks.
Equally important are relevant Articles of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) that require States Parties to enhance transparency and effectiveness in i access to information, including by respecting, promoting and protecting the freedom to seek and disseminate information concerning corruption (Article 10, Article 13b, Article 13d).
Regionally, African countries have made progress in developing and adopting laws and policies that guarantee the right to information. In 2025, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) noted that 29 African States had adopted access to information laws following the adoption of the African Model Law on Access to Information in 2013. Senegal subsequently adopted its first dedicated access to information law in August 2025.
From adopting laws to making them work
Drawing on his organization’s sub-regional focus, Alfred Bulakali of ARTICLE 19 West Africa reflected on the overall implementation of access to information in West Africa and particularly Senegal’s adoption of an access to information law in August 2025. He described the reform in Senegal as the result of sustained civil society advocacy and engagement with a new political leadership committed to greater transparency. By showing how access to information could support the government’s anti-corruption agenda, advocates helped build support for the legislation alongside related reforms on whistleblower protection and asset declarations.
Alfred also highlighted the distance between legislative commitments and everyday experience with his organization, for instance submitting 12 information requests in Senegal over the preceding three months and receiving only one response.
He further posited that implementation requires investment within public institutions including training officials and establishing systems for disclosure, alongside efforts to help citizens understand how to exercise their rights. It also requires addressing laws and practices that undermine access to information as there have been incidents across the region of journalists and activists facing prosecution under other legislations such as anti-terrorism and cybercrime laws, and criminal defamation provisions when they disclose information concerning alleged corruption or security matters even where the right to information is formally recognized.
Addressing un-answered or delayed responses to ATI requests
Mercy Abiro of the Africa Freedom of Information Centre (AFIC) highlighted AFIC’s regional work to explain why implementation of ATI laws remains difficult. Public bodies need clear procedures for handling requests, reliable records management and officers with the capacity to respond. Access to information must become part of institutions’ routine work and reporting, supported by public awareness of how to use the law.
Citing AFIC’s analysis of information requests in Uganda between 2018 and 2025, Mercy reported that only 14% received complete and substantive responses while 75% received no response at all – closely related to Alfred’s highlighted experience on information requests in Senegal. These unanswered requests leave requesting organizations or individuals without either the information sought or an explanation for its withholding. In some instances, responses arrived after six months or a year, and would not end up serving its original purpose. These delays to release information, even if eventually released, raises questions on whether itn is reliable enough to inform decisions and support public accountability.
To address these challenges, she highlighted the need for effective consequences or sanctions when institutions fail to comply. For the right to information to be realized and for the existing laws to be effective in practice there should be corrective action taken by responsible institutions.
Assessing what government institutions publish
Umar Yakubu of the Center for Fiscal Transparency and Public Integrity (CeFTPI) presented a practical approach to assessing disclosure through CeFTPI’s Transparency and Integrity Index. The Center examines what public institutions proactively publish on their websites, including budget, expenditure, procurement and audit information, providing a way to assess disclosure beyond responses to individual requests.
Umar explained that this approach draws on Nigeria’s Freedom of Information Act and its provisions on proactive disclosure. Publishing information without waiting for a request reduces the burden on citizens and enables wider scrutiny of how public resources are managed. An important distinction emerged between the types of information being released with Umar reporting noticeable improvements in the publication of budgets and financial information while procurement disclosure continued to lag behind in Nigeria. For anti-corruption work, this gap matters as the publishing of budgets does not on its own allow citizens to scrutinize how contracts are awarded and public money is spent – access to information related to the public is required to guarantee transparency and accountability.
How access to information laws interact with secrecy and national security laws
The relationship between access to information and laws governing secrecy and national security came into focus during the plenary session. Participants raised concerns about institutions invoking national security provisions to withhold information and the implications for public scrutiny.
Alfred argued that legitimate security concerns should not place entire sectors beyond public scrutiny. He called for consideration of the public interest in disclosure, particularly where information could expose corruption or wrongdoing. The challenge is to prevent protections intended for sensitive information from becoming a shield against transparency and accountability.
In conclusion, it is evident from the discussion and experiences shared during the regional meeting that there are priority issues for regional advocacy on access to information such as following up on unanswered requests, examining what institutions proactively disclose and challenging restrictions that prevent scrutiny of public spending.
–––––
If you are a civil society activist from Sub-Saharan Africa and would like to become involved, please contact our Regional Coordinator Lewis Kundai at lewis.kundai@uncaccoalition.org.
