By Agness Changala
Solicitor General Marshal Muchende says the Access to Information Law has placed a responsibility on people who manage the affairs of the public to be responsible and accountable to the public through the media.
And Muchende says nothing stops a media house from taking out an order of mandamus, compelling an institution that does not want to give information to do so.
Meanwhile, Muchende has warned that the Act entails that media houses that advance malicious and defamatory agendas of the third parties by publishing stories that are injurious expose themselves to expensive litigation in form of defamatory actions.
Speaking to Daily Revelation on the newly enacted Access to Information Act, Muchende said under the UPND government, media houses can now practice their calling in the manner that lessens or mitigates the risk and exposure to defamation cases.
He said media houses will be able to run their stories based on impeccable sources and accurate information as opposed to rumors and malicious stories by members of the public that may have malicious agendas against others.
“And this is now possible with the promulgation of the Access to Information Act No 24 of 2023. Media houses are now able to follow through with stories they are investigating in a proper manner from authorities who are the custodians of the information that they are asking for,” Muchende said.
He said the Access to Information Act also entails that the UPND government had placed a burden on those people who manage the affairs of the public through the fourth estate which was the media, adding that anything now was within the reach of the media houses.
“But this also entails that media houses that advance malicious and defamatory agendas of thirds parties of certain individuals by publishing stories that are injurious to innocent public officers, those media houses now expose themselves to expensive litigation in form of expensive litigation in the form of defamatory actions of libel because they have an opportunity now to elicit or extract accurate information which can either validate or discredit the grapevine or malicious story that they are hearing from the public,” Muchende said. “There is therefore, need for caution and responsibility from both the members of the public and indeed the members of the fourth estate to be careful and ensure that there is fairness and professionalism in the discharge of functions from both sides.
He said if one wanted information about what was going on, with the Attorney Generals’ office and whichever institution, they were free to do so.
Muchende said any media house that heard a report from sources, they could invoke the Access to information Act to properly extract the right information so that they mitigate and minimize the risk for defamatory actions.
He also said the Act was comprehensive and catered for situations where the person or institution responsible to give information failed to do so.
“There is nothing stopping you as a media practitioner to actually issue a suit for what is known as an order of mandamus to compel that institution to give you the information that you are asking for. This is done in the actions in Judicial Review and things happen very quickly, you are able to get that remedy but ordinarily, it should not get to that stage, the government has nothing to hide and this is the reason why the government or President signed this bill, signed this Act,” he said.
