A/HRC/44/49 the Child (art. 17) and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (art. 9), and reaffirmed in instruments related to the environment, corruption and development.22 One indicator for target 16.10 of the Sustainable Development Goals is the number of countries that adopt and implement constitutional, statutory and/or policy guarantees for public access to information. 20. The previous mandate holder noted that the design and implementation of freedom of information laws should be guided by principles of: (a) maximum disclosure; (b) obligation to publish; (c) promotion of open government; (d) limited scope of exceptions; (e) processes to facilitate access; and (f) disclosure taking precedence. (A/68/362, para. 76.) Article 19: International Centre against Censorship, described the underlying purposes well: “Information allows people to scrutinise the actions of a government and is the basis for proper, informed debate of those actions.”23 It is not as if a health crisis, such as a pandemic, limits the importance of access to information or the role of accountability in ensuring that government operates in accordance with the best interests of its people. To the contrary, a public health threat strengthens the arguments for open government, for it is only by knowing the full scope of the threat posed by disease that individuals and their communities can make appropriate personal choices and public health decisions. A Government that deprives the public of reliable information puts individuals at risk and can justify such deprivation only on the narrowest grounds and with the greatest degree of necessity to protect a legitimate interest. Even where a Government is legitimately concerned about releasing information that could cause individuals to panic, it is likely that failure to disclose is not the only option. For instance, sharing information that is properly contextualized may advance both public policy and freedom of expression guarantees. 21. It may be expected that, during the pandemic, some Governments may face resource constraints that interfere with their capacity to carry out their obligations to provide access to public information. To a certain extent, temporary disruptions may be expected and will generally not constitute a violation of article 19 of the Covenant, given the potential inability of staff to meet in person or for hearings to be held.24 However, such disruptions should only take place when necessary for public health and should not be an excuse for failing to carry out activities for which there is no limited-capacity justification. Indeed, given the likelihood that social distancing measures may continue for some time, or may recur, Governments should be developing approaches to access to information that enable them to continue their programmes during the crisis. 22. One of the mechanisms used by Governments to ensure public access to information is to provide media access to officials, documentation and other information resources. This may include regular press briefings in which public health and other officials provide detailed information to the public and answer questions from an independent media. Unfortunately, there have been reports of several instances involving direct interference with this mode of actively providing access to information. These types of restrictions tend towards closing off access to reliable information, disabling independent journalists from addressing questions to officials and thus clarifying public health orders, and limit the ability to hold officials accountable for decisions made during the pandemic. 23. The openness of government to media is especially important when public officials provide inconsistent, unclear or otherwise confusing information to the public. The goal in a public health crisis must be for government to provide accurate information, or information that is as accurate as possible and framed appropriately as uncertain or 22 23 24 8 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, principle 10; United Nations Convention against Corruption, art. 13; 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Public’s Right to Know: Principles on Freedom of Information Legislation (London, 1999), p. 1. For instance, the Government of India indicated that to comply with an order of the Ministry of Home Affairs, the right-to-information oversight body, the Central Information Commission was closed for a period of 21 days beginning on 25 March 2020, and all information commissioners were working from home only. All scheduled hearings before the Commission were deferred during that period. Urgent matters would be heard through audio conference. The Government of Pakistan likewise noted that all cases scheduled for hearing were postponed. See Access Info Europe and the Centre for Law and Democracy, COVID-19 Tracker. Available at www.rti-rating.org/covid-19-tracker/.