The Sunday Mail
Dr Samuel Chindaro
In 2012, the then Minister of Information Communication Technology, Mr Nelson Chamisa, embarked on a process to review the national ICT policy “to put it in line with current technological developments”.The ministry had produced the first National Information and Communication Technology Policy Framework in December 2005.
This framework set out the policy trajectory on e-governance, education, commerce and SMFs (small and medium firms), tourism and environment, mining and manufacturing, agriculture, health, transport, gender, the youths, disabled and aged, and human resources development.
This was followed by a Strategic Plan five years later (Ministry of Information and Communication Technology — Strategic Plan 2010-2014). In essence, the strategic plan was expected to provide a guideline for the country in the implementation of ICT policies and regulation. Despite the existence of this plan, Mr Chamisa believed it was necessary to come up with a “new” ICT policy.
To do this, in 2012 he set up a team which visited all the country’s 10 provinces and consulted with various institutions in order to draft the policy and review the document for validation. After these consultations, Mr Chamisa produced the 2012 Draft ICT Policy.
However, the quality of the draft was shocking to say the least, as there were seemingly blatant attempts to plagiarise previous documents.
It was indicative of a last-minute and rushed job, which was not carefully thought out and implemented. This author did a review of this draft and an audit of various ministry’s websites at that juncture, having been shocked by the quality and content of the document.
One of the aims of both the 2005 policy framework and the 2010 Strategic Plan was to facilitate the establishment of decent websites for ministries, but the most remarkable thing about the MICT website at the time was its poor quality.
For a ministry that was supposed to be spearheading the development of ICT, the website did not inspire confidence or hope; that is, during the few times it was up.
The content on the website was old and had not been updated for donkey years.
In fact, it was populated by blank links.
The striking image that would great the reader was the picture of the ‘Hon Minister’, and beyond that, nothing much of substance.
It seems large portions of the objectives that were outlined in the 2012 draft were lifted from the 2005 document. Further, the policy objectives in the 2012 draft were doctored and strangely started from (f), leaving one wondering what could have happened to sections (a) to (e)!
This was clear indication of a recycled policy, lack of adequate effort, including lack of attention to detail, which should not be the case when dealing with a document of national importance. A further look at the section dealing with “challenges facing the ICTs sector” also yielded similar results.
The outline of challenges such as inadequate communications infrastructure, ICT facilities and skills, among others, were exactly the same.
In addition, the main policy statements regarding the ICT sector were exactly the same (compare section 3.5.1 of the 2005 document with section 4.4 of the 2012 draft policy).
The only difference was in the numbering, where letters were simply replaced with numbers — a textbook example of trying to mask a copy-and-paste job and blatant plagiarism.
Further scrutiny of the different policy statements on e-Government, education and tourism also revealed that there was little or nothing new.
As evidence of manipulation of the 2005 policy, attention could be drawn to the conclusions of both policies; instead of trying to analyse them for the public, both conclusions have been pasted on the table.
It is acceptable and entirely reasonable that the drafting of the 2012 document could not be done from scratch, and that this was a review or revision of the 2005 policy.
What was not acceptable was sentences being re-arranged and deliberately tweaked to mask duplication or clear plagiarism.
The reader is left to judge on the amount of work done in trying to come up with the ‘new’ 2012 policy, and the justification in all the funding used, including meetings held in coming up with a document of such appalling quality.
Overall, the 2012 draft policy did not present any significant new ideas.
It was inadequate, of poor quality, and was not based on a clear review or documentation of what had been achieved over the years.
As revealed, documented and evidenced above, calling this policy ‘new or revised’ was offensive and an insult to the public’s intelligence.
It was shocking plagiarism and deceitfulness, which had not been expected from such an important ministry spearheading the advancement of technology in the country.
This is an extract and adaptation of an article published by The Sunday Mail in 2012. Subsequently, the 2012 ICT Policy was revised again and the MICT website was facelifted — this was three years after the MICT was established under the inclusive Government.
Dr Samuel Chindaro holds a PhD in Electronics (University of Kent), MSc in Electronics and IT (University of Birmingham) and a B.Eng. (Hons) in Electronic Engineering (NUST). He is a Chartered Engineer (Institution of Engineering and Technology). Feedback: [email protected]
