PAIA Civil Society Network Shadow Report: 2011

The PAIA Civil Society Network Shadow Report: 2011 evaluates the implementation of the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) in South Africa between August 1, 2010, and July 30, 2011. The report finds that while civil society's use of the Act for strategic advocacy has increased, the performance of information holders has declined, characterized by a high rate of 'deemed refusals' and a lack of affordable dispute resolution mechanisms.

• Between August 1, 2010, and July 30, 2011, there was a significant increase in PAIA requests made by civil society, rising from 111 requests in the previous 12 months to 162 requests. This growth reflects an increased use of the Act as a "strategic advocacy tool".
• The overall performance of information holders declined during the reporting period, with a decrease in information release and an increase in refusals. Specifically, 53 per cent of requests were refused, compared to 34 per cent in the preceding year. Full releases dropped from 34 per cent to 22 per cent.
• Deemed refusals—where information holders fail to respond to a request—have increased substantially. Three quarters of initial refusals and three quarters of internal appeals against refusals were deemed refusals.
• The South African Police Service (SAPS) was the highest performing public body among those receiving a high volume of requests, granting full release in five out of six requests and responding within the statutory timeframe in four of those five cases.
• The Department of Mineral Resources showed concerning performance; of 30 requests, 15 received no initial response. Additionally, none of the 13 internal appeals submitted to the department received a response. The department frequently used standardised letters to deny access based on commercial interests or policy formulation, sometimes refusing information that was not even requested.
• Requests to private bodies saw a marked improvement in responsiveness but still faced a high refusal rate of 57 per cent. Civil society organisations often avoid requesting information from private bodies due to the strict court interpretation that records must be 'essential or necessary' rather than just 'useful or relevant'.
• Compliance with statutory timeframes remains low, with only one quarter of requests responded to within the legal limit. The report attributes this to poor record keeping, under-resourcing, and poor communication.
• The report advocates for the creation of an independent information commissioner to provide a cheap and swift alternative to court litigation, which is currently too expensive for most South Africans and civil society organisations.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (2011). PAIA Civil Society Network Shadow Report: 2011. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/PAIAShadowReport2011.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. PAIA Civil Society Network Shadow Report: 2011. 2011. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/PAIAShadowReport2011.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=PAIA Civil Society Network Shadow Report: 2011 |date=2011 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/PAIAShadowReport2011.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrights2011paia, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{PAIA Civil Society Network Shadow Report: 2011}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2011}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/PAIAShadowReport2011.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }