UMVA has learned that a major milestone has been reached in the long struggle for the people's right to know, as the Right to Information (RTI) Bill has gained significant momentum in the legislative process.
The House of Representatives has approved its version of the bill on third reading with an overwhelming 284 affirmative votes, and the Senate has also passed its own version with 22 votes in favor, with no opposition or abstentions in either chamber.
While this development may seem to signal that the enactment of an RTI law is within reach, advocates are approaching the situation with caution, aware that the legislative process is not yet complete and that several hurdles remain.
Congress has adjourned sine die amid a leadership dispute in the Senate, and the implications for legislative business are uncertain, but despite these caveats, this moment is still considered the most promising in the long struggle for the people's right to know.
This is not simply because the bill is approaching enactment; in fact, there have been previous instances where the bill had progressed further, only to be stalled, but what makes this moment different is the foundation of political acceptance, institutional experience, and democratic practice that has been built.
For the first time, the legislative progress is accompanied by a broad political consensus that the constitutional right to information and the State policy of full public disclosure deserve comprehensive statutory operationalization, with support for the measure coming from across party lines, ideological tendencies, and majority-minority divides.
This suggests that the people's right to know is increasingly viewed not as the agenda of a particular administration, opposition, or advocacy sector, but as a democratic norm that should endure across political transitions.
The story of the right to know in the Philippines is no longer merely a story about legislation; the constitutional right to information dates back to the 1973 Constitution and was strengthened in the 1987 Constitution.
Over the years, citizens, journalists, researchers, lawyers, community organizations, and civil society groups have continued to test and exercise the constitutional right even in the absence of comprehensive legislation, leading to the development of a social and democratic practice.
Courts have developed jurisprudence, government agencies have adopted varying disclosure practices, and citizens have learned not only how to ask for information but also how to use it, resulting in the right to information gradually developing as a social and democratic practice.
This development is visible within the government itself, where agencies have come to realize that operationalizing access to information is not only possible but manageable, and that transparency can be implemented without impairing governmental functions.
The experience under Executive Order No. 2, issued in 2016, provided an important opportunity to test many of these assumptions, and the Freedom of Information Program Management Office played a crucial role in demonstrating that access to information can work in the real world.
The bill that emerged from the committee process reflects years of accumulated experience, dialogue, adjustment, trust-building, and learning about how access to information can work in the real world, representing an unusual degree of convergence among legislators, government agencies, the bureaucracy, media organizations, civil society advocates, and other stakeholders.
The enactment of an RTI law, should it finally occur, will not represent the culmination of the right-to-know movement; rather, it will represent another beginning, and its success will be measured by whether citizens use information effectively and responsibly.
Ultimately, this moment is significant not only because of the legislative milestone but also because it marks the maturation of a democratic culture on the right to information capable of sustaining it, making this the most promising moment for the people's right to know.
