FAFEN report shows 54% proactive disclosure, leaving large gaps in transparency and accountability
ISLAMABAD:
Government bodies in Sindh are disclosing just over half of the information they are legally required to publish, underscoring persistent gaps in transparency despite the existence of a comprehensive right to information framework, according to a new assessment by the Free and Fair Election Network (FAFEN).
The latest Transparency Assessment Report reveals that government agencies in the province proactively publish an average of 54 percent of the information mandated under the Sindh Transparency and Right to Information (STRI) Act, 2016.
FAFEN also warns that the lack leaves considerable room for opacity, weak accountability and misinformation.
The assessment is part of FAFEN’s Countering Disinformation through Information campaign, which emphasizes proactive disclosure as a cornerstone of institutional transparency and a safeguard against misinformation and disinformation.
It reviewed 61 public bodies across Sindh, including 36 secretariat departments and 25 associate departments, against the disclosure obligations outlined in Section 6 of the STRI Act.
Under the law, public bodies are required to proactively publish information across 14 categories covering organizational details, public services, legal frameworks, decision-making processes and mechanisms for accessing information.
The Act also requires that such information be regularly updated and made available in accessible formats, including online.
Overall performance varied across institutional levels. The secretarial departments fared relatively better, disclosing an average of 59 per cent. of the necessary information, while affiliated departments lagged behind with an average disclosure rate of 48 per cent.
Among the secretariat departments, the finance department, the investment department and the chief minister’s secretariat emerged as the most transparent, each disclosing 80 percent of the mandated information.
The information department followed with a compliance rate of 73 per cent. Among affiliated departments, the Human Rights Directorate led with 73 percent compliance, followed by the Bureau of Statistics at 67 percent.
Despite these relatively stronger results, the assessment highlights systemic weaknesses across most public bodies. Almost half of the information required by law remains undisclosed, with particularly poor compliance in areas related to decision-making, financial transparency and implementation of right to information procedures.
Basic organizational information – such as information about functions and duties – was the most commonly published category, published by 95 per cent of public bodies. Information related to public services and delivery conditions as well as applicable legal frameworks were also disclosed by 95 percent of the assessed institutions.
However, compliance fell significantly in governance-related areas. Only 15 percent of public bodies disclosed decision-making processes, while only 10 percent published details of administrative and development decisions. Budget transparency also remained limited, with only 54 percent of public bodies publishing partial or full budget information.
Disclosure of grant and benefit programs was particularly weak, with only five percent of public bodies publishing relevant details. Similarly, only seven percent disclosed information about recipients of concessions, permits, licenses or permits.
The assessment also found that only 14 per cent of public bodies published contact details of public information officers (PIOs), while only six per cent disclosed records of requests for information received and actions taken, despite both being mandatory requirements under the STRI Act.
FAFEN called on Sindh’s provincial institutions to strengthen proactive disclosure practices, particularly by leveraging digital platforms to ensure timely, accurate and accessible public information.
The organization said it would soon share detailed recommendations aimed at improving enforcement of the STRI Act and addressing the persistent transparency gaps identified in the assessment.
