FAFEN report shows 54% proactive disclosure, leaving major gaps in transparency and accountability
ISLAMABAD:
Public bodies in Sindh are disclosing just over half of the information they are legally required to make public, 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 public authorities in the province proactively disclose an average of 54 per cent of information mandated under the Sindh Transparency and Right to Information (STRI) Act, 2016.
FAFEN further warns that the shortfall leaves significant space for opacity, weak accountability and disinformation.
The assessment forms part of FAFEN’s Countering Disinformation through Information campaign, which emphasises proactive disclosure as a cornerstone of institutional transparency and a safeguard against mis- and disinformation.
It reviewed 61 public bodies across Sindh, including 36 Secretariat Departments and 25 Attached 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 organisational details, public services, legal frameworks, decision-making processes and mechanisms for accessing information.
The Act also mandates that such information be regularly updated and made available in accessible formats, including online.
Overall performance varied across institutional tiers. Secretariat Departments fared relatively better, disclosing an average of 59 per cent of the required information, while Attached Departments lagged behind with an average disclosure rate of 48 per cent.
Among the Secretariat Departments, the Finance Department, Investment Department and the Chief Minister’s Secretariat emerged as the most transparent, each disclosing 80 per cent of the mandated information.
The Information Department followed with a compliance rate of 73 per cent. Among Attached Departments, the Directorate of Human Rights led with 73 per cent compliance, followed by the Bureau of Statistics at 67 per cent.
Despite these comparatively stronger performers, the assessment highlights systemic weaknesses across most public bodies. Nearly half of the information required under the law remains undisclosed, with particularly poor compliance in areas related to decision-making, financial transparency and implementation of right to information procedures.
Basic organisational information – such as particulars of functions and duties – was the most commonly disclosed category, published by 95 per cent of public bodies. Information related to public services and service delivery conditions, as well as applicable legal frameworks, was also disclosed by 95 per cent of the assessed institutions.
However, compliance dropped sharply in governance-related areas. Only 15 per cent of public bodies disclosed decision-making processes, while just 10 per cent published details of administrative and developmental decisions. Budget transparency also remained limited, with only 54 per cent of public bodies publishing partial or complete budget information.
Disclosure of subsidy and benefit programmes was particularly weak, with only five percent of public bodies making relevant details public. Similarly, only seven per cent disclosed information regarding recipients of concessions, permits, licences or authorisations.
The assessment also found that only 14 per cent of public bodies published contact details of Public Information Officers (PIOs), while a mere six per cent disclosed records of information requests received and actions taken, despite both being mandatory requirements under the STRI Act.
FAFEN urged Sindh’s provincial institutions to strengthen proactive disclosure practices, particularly by leveraging digital platforms to ensure timely, accurate and accessible public information.
The organisation 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.
