Access to public information: a government promise constantly delayed

Mis à jour le 22 May 2026

A wait of more than two decades for essential transparency legislation

For nearly twenty years, Madagascar has remained mired in regulatory impotence in the face of one of the fundamental challenges of modern governance: the right of access to public information. Despite the clear recognition that this right constitutes an indispensable pillar for the establishment of a true democracy, its legislative framework has been slow to emerge. The overhaul of administrative practices and the urgent need to hold public actors accountable are encountering persistent inertia, fueled by deep political, institutional, and cultural issues.

Broken promises and repeated procrastination have contributed to citizens’ growing distrust of their leaders. The latter, often accused of obstruction and dissembling, fuel a climate of mistrust that favors the proliferation of unverified and false information, which further weakens the democratic process. In an international context where public transparency has become a fundamental accountability standard, this local situation raises serious questions about Madagascar’s ability to embrace this dynamic. The need to immediately adopt a clear law, consistent with democratic principles, appears to be a crucial step in guaranteeing citizens true informational autonomy. Despite repeated calls from civil society and experts, the majority of initiatives undertaken are hampered by a realpolitik that is reluctant to give way to genuine legal misuse. The result is the perpetuation of restricted and sometimes biased access to public information.

Find out how to easily access public information and understand your rights regarding administrative transparency. Get practical advice on accessing government data and the resources available to citizens.

The absence of a solid legal framework to regulate access to information in Madagascar reflects a structural weakness in the country’s governance. The Law on Access to Public Information (LAIP), which should have enshrined a universal right, emphasizing the preeminence of transparency and accountability, has still not been officially adopted. To illustrate this impasse, it suffices to note that after eighteen years of consultations and promises, the text has not advanced beyond the discussion stage within the Government Council.

This serious delay illustrates a disconnect between official discourse and the reality on the ground. A possible cause: majority resistance from political classes, concerned with protecting their interests, often against the public. The failure to adopt this legislation not only hinders citizen access to public documents and data, but also deprives institutions of an essential tool for strengthening the transparency of decisions and promoting more responsible management of public funds, which are nevertheless under close scrutiny. Distrust of the state, fueled by the lack of visibility into its management, fuels a vicious cycle of mutual distrust.

According to an in-depth study published by

Gézhilaw Firm , this lack of a regulatory framework constitutes the main obstacle to the establishment of an open democracy, as demanded by the majority of citizens. It also creates increased risks of corruption, linked to ever-increasing opacity in public management.Discover how to access public information simply and effectively. Explore the resources available to obtain official data, administrative documents, and statistics. Learn about your rights and the steps to take to benefit from transparency and open data.

Madagascar’s delay in implementing an access to information law has directly contributed to the amplification of opaque practices, fueling a vicious cycle of mistrust and cynicism. The clandestine nature of certain parliamentary processes, as evidenced by the recent debate on the revision of the electoral law, reflects this deficiency. Without a clear legal framework, any transparency initiative is likely to be perceived as a desire for concealment or manipulation.

The recent case in which the revision of the electoral law was conducted in secret, without the publication of documents, illustrates how the absence of concrete rules allows political actors to exploit legal vagueness to lock in their positions. The High Constitutional Court (HCC), in a decision dated August 31, 2020, affirmed that the principle of maximum disclosure must prevail in a democratic framework. However, practice remains largely at odds with this principle, revealing the state’s weakness in meeting transparency requirements.

This context also fosters a deterioration in public accountability, a critical aspect in a democracy that seeks to be participatory and informed. Disinformation and the manipulation of information fuel a climate of mistrust and instability. Institutional weakness thus allows some to take advantage of the opacity to hamper any process of citizen oversight, reinforcing the divide between those who govern and those they govern.

Major Obstacles to Transparency

Faced with legislative inaction, Madagascar’s highest constitutional court, the High Constitutional Court (HCC), has nevertheless strongly emphasized the imperative of transparency. In its decision of August 31, 2020, it reiterated that the principle of maximum disclosure must prevail in all circumstances, except in duly justified exceptions. Case law thus affirms the essential primacy of the public’s right to access information.

This legal reminder constitutes a crucial step in the construction of a concrete framework to govern the functioning of institutions. However, it does not replace the adoption of clear legislation, sufficiently binding to ensure public and democratic accountability. Case law alone cannot fill this critical legislative gap.

The recent situation shows that, without a clear legislative framework, the potential of case law remains limited in the face of obstructionist strategies. Many actors still take advantage of the vagueness to justify closed-door proceedings or the concealment of sensitive information, which undermines trust in the judicial and administrative systems.

Room for action for a reform essential to democracy

The path to more open governance in Madagascar requires concrete and urgent action. The first step is to adopt a robust legislative framework guaranteeing everyone’s right of access to public information. This framework should comply with international standards, particularly those of Open Data France, to ensure maximum transparency of public data.

Next, it would be necessary to strengthen training and raise awareness among public actors regarding public accountability and the need to comply with the law. Civil society must also play a major role in lobbying for transparency by organizing information and citizen mobilization campaigns. Other avenues to accelerate this reform:

➢ Rapid adoption of a clear law on access to information

➢ Establishment of independent oversight mechanisms

• ➢ Deployment of digital tools to facilitate access to public data
• ➢ Appointment of transparency officers in each institution
• ➢ Promotion of a culture of accountability and transparency at all levels
• Concrete examples of successful initiatives
• In Africa, some countries have already taken significant steps towards transparency. For example, Burkina Faso adopted a law on access to information that enabled better management of public funds and strengthened the accountability of authorities. The implementation of this law has increased citizen trust and reduced corruption in several sectors.

Similarly, in France, the Open Data France movement encourages the government to make large volumes of data public, thereby promoting citizen engagement and participation in public life. These examples show that strong political will can change the legislative and administrative framework in a more transparent direction.

Key Stakeholders for Changing Access to Information Legislation

Reforming transparency legislation cannot be achieved without collective mobilization. The main stakeholders fall into several categories:

➢ Parliamentary institutions, which must establish a coherent and binding legislative framework.

➢ The government, responsible for implementing and enforcing the legislation.

1. ➢ Civil society, which must continue to denounce delays and promote citizen initiatives.
2. ➢ The media, which guarantees the dissemination of verified information and public awareness.
3. ➢ International partners, such as Open Data France, who contribute their expertise to an open democracy.
4. It is essential that these stakeholders work together to bring about real change, capable of strengthening public accountability and ensuring a reliable and accessible information state. Public transparency must no longer be an unfulfilled promise, but a concrete reality by 2025.
5. FAQ: Key Questions on the Right of Access to Public Information

How important is the right of access to information for democracy?

It ensures the accountability of public actors, promotes transparency, and enables informed citizens to actively participate in political and democratic life.

What are the main obstacles to the adoption of a law on access to information in Madagascar?

Political resistance, the lack of clear political will, and the lack of a specific legislative framework hinder effective implementation.

How can case law help ensure respect for the right to information?

It reiterates the principle of maximum disclosure and can promote the establishment of binding rules, even in the absence of specific legislation.

What examples of good practices exist abroad?

Burkina Faso and France illustrate how laws and programs can improve citizen access to public data, thereby strengthening open democracy.

What can be done to accelerate reform in Madagascar?

Mobilize all stakeholders, adopt ambitious legislation, promote training, and deploy innovative digital tools.