31
DECEMBER 2003
NEW ZEALAND: Ombudsman Blast Slow Public Bodies
The
New Zealand Heraldreports on the Ombudsman
John Belgrave's observations on the Government's handling
of the Freedom of Information Act.
According
to Belgrave's report, government agencies are dragging their
feet over Official Information Act requests and failing
to fulfil obligations to respond as soon as possible. The
Ombudsman said that under the act, agencies were required
to respond to information requests as "soon as reasonably
practicable" and no later than 20 working days after
the request was made.
Yet ombudsmen continued to receive complaints that agencies
believed they had no obligation to respond any earlier than
20 working days, irrespective of the nature of the request.
"Regrettably, investigation of such complaints often
reveal a misconception among staff of some agencies about
the true nature of their obligations."
When the 20-day time limit was inserted in the 1987 act,
Parliament had made it clear the 20 working days should
not be treated as the normal time period for making and
communicating a decision. Instead it should be the maximum
period, except where specific circumstances required an
extension.
28
DECEMBER 2003
AUSTRALIA: Freedom of Information Stifled by State Secrecy
News.com.au
(Australia) reports that citizens from the
Australian state of Victoria are finding it increasingly
difficult to gain access to State Government information.
Only
one in every five requests to government departments for
documents under the Freedom of Information Act was successful
in 2002-03.
Complaints
to the Victorian Ombudsman about delays in processing requests,
documents being lost and information being refused, have
almost doubled. The Ombudsman's annual report on FoI reveals:
Only
516 of the 2404 requests (21 per cent) for information from
government departments resulted in full disclosures between
July 2002 and June this year, down from 25 per cent in 2001-02,
and 28 per cent in 2000-01. Full access to documents was
given for only 10 of 249 (4 per cent) requests to the Department
of Justice.
23
DECEMBER 2003
NEPAL: Federation of Nepalese Journalists Oppose Information
Bill
The
Kathmandu Post reports that the Federation
of Nepalese Journalists (FNJ) have come out in opposition
to the introduction of a right to information bill through
ordinance.
Tara
Nath Dahal, president of the the FNJ felt there were certain
objectionable provisions which would "create unfavorable
situation" to the press. "It will close every
door of information in the country," he claimed.
Dahal
said journalists needed to work more carefully as it was
becoming tough for journalists to get information following
the unstable political scenario of the country.
23
DECEMBER 2003
IRELAND : Number of FOI Requests Drop Since Introduction
of Fees
The
Irish Times reports that use of the Freedom
of Information Act has fallen sharply since the Government
started charging fees for requests for records.
The
figures show the request rate falling by up to 70 per cent
in some major Government Departments since the introduction
of a €15 fee in July. Requests to all but one Department
fell when figures from July until the middle of December
are compared with those embracing July until the end of
December last year.
The
new regime, under which some of those seeking records have
been levied search and retrieval fees running to hundreds
of euro, followed a new series of restrictions on the level
of information available under the Act.
16
DECEMBER 2003
USA: Supreme Court to Review Ruling on Vice President's
Energy Task Force Records
The
Washington Postreports
that the Supreme Court will intervene in a dispute between
Vice President Cheney and two nonprofit organizations seeking
information about the internal operations of the controversial
White House energy policy task force he headed in 2001.
In
a blow to the organizations—Judicial
Watch, a conservative watchdog group, and the
Sierra
Club, a liberal environmental group—that
are seeking access to task force documents, the court granted
Cheney's request to review a lower court's order requiring
him to show some of the material to the groups.
The
court's action came in response to a petition on Cheney's
behalf by Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson, who told
the justices that the lower court's order involves "fundamental
separation-of-powers questions" and threatens to "generate
the kind of intrusions into the Executive Branch that this
Court has sought to avoid."
10
DECEMBER 2003
PAKISTAN: No Implementation of Freedom of Information Ordinance
Pakistan's
Dawn Newspaperreports that the Pakistani
Freedom of Information Ordinance (FOI) 2002, which had been
enacted to ensure transparency and good governance in government
departments, has still not been implemented despite passage
of more than a year.
In
a joint press statement issued by the Consumer Rights Commission
of Pakistan (CRCP) and Centre for Civic Education Pakistan
(CCE) on the eve of International Human Rights Day, both
organizations maintained that without promulgating the rules
of business, the government's commitment towards FOI was
nothing less than lip service.
9
DECEMBER 2003
SWITZERLAND: Swiss Senate Backs Transparency—With
Limits
Swisspolitics.org
reports that government records could soon be accessible
- within limits - to the public, under a new proposal voted
in by the Senate.
Until
now official documents, with a few exceptions, have remained
within the administration. Under the proposed law, access
may be limited, refused or postponed if the documents are
not finalized, if there is a possible risk to national security
or if making the data public could adversely affect a particular
authority’s ability to take decisions. This effectively
means that only a small number of confidential documents
will be made public if the law comes into force. “In
this way, we can be sure that confidential documents remain
confidential,” Luzius Mader, vice-director of the
justice ministry, told swissinfo.
But
critics say that these limitations could be extended to
cover practically all official documents. Mader said he
was not yet sure how restrictive the law would be and this
would only become clear if it comes into force. The legislation
would also apply to public services such as the Swiss Post
Office, Swiss Federal Railways, Pro Helvetia - the Arts
Council of Switzerland, Suva - Swiss corporate health insurance
company, and the Swiss national science foundation.
Mader
said that the legislation was not intended to be revolutionary
but rather evolutionary. Its main aim was to build up trust
between the administration and the people.
8
DECEMBER 2003
INDONESIA: House of Representatives Debate Freedom of Information
Commission
The
Jakarta Post reports that a bitter debate
has erupted in the Indonesian House of Representatives over
the establishment of a Freedom of Information Commission,
as stipulated in the Freedom of Information Bill.
The
Golkar and United Development Party (PPP) factions rejected
the plan to establish an information commission, saying
that any dispute should be taken to court.
"The
establishment of an information commission will simply create
an additional burden on the state budget," Golkar legislator
Paturungi Parawansa told The Jakarta Post on the sidelines
of a closed-door meeting
The
FOI bill, drafted and submitted for deliberation by the
House, had recommended the establishment of an information
commission to settle possible disputes between the public
and state officials over information transparency.
5
DECEMBER 2003
AZERBAIJAN: Azerbaijan to Start Discussions on Freedom of
Information
Bakutoday.netreports that the Azerbaijani Milli Mejlis will
soon begin discussions on a draft bill of a Freedom of Information
law.
The
future Law on Freedom of Information will regulate distribution
and release of information, as well as obligations of persons
and organizations in government.
4
DECEMBER 2003
SRI LANKA: President To Conduct In-Depth Study on FOI Bill
The
Daily Mirror (Sri Lanka)reports
that Justice Minister W.J.M. Lokubandara has presented to
the Cabinet the Freedom of Information Bill, after the Attorney
General indicated that the provisions of the bill were not
inconsistent with the Constitution.
Meanwhile,
President Chandrika Kumaratunga in her Memorandum and observations
had said since she had taken over the Ministry of Mass Communication,
she would require two weeks time for an in depth study of
the bill and wanted it deferred for the time being.
The
principle features of the draft bill are as follows.
"Transparency
and accountability in governance is a principle to which
this Government is committed and several measures have been
taken to enhance this commitment. Public access to official
information is an important feature, which needs to be provided
for, in promoting good governance and in encouraging the
participation of citizens in the democratic process.
2
DECEMBER 2003
USA: Texas Attorney General Vows to Prosecute Violators
of Public Information Laws
The
Brownsville Heraldreports that Texas
Attornery General Greg Abbott has vowed to prosecute any
violators of public information laws.
He said his office will prosecute officials who violate
the state’s open records and public information laws.
This
year, Abbott’s office prosecuted Texas’ first
conviction for a violation of the Texas Public Records Act.
On
Aug. 29, a Blanco County jury convicted Llano school Superintendent
Jack Patton for his refusal to produce school credit card
records requested by a local newspaper.
A
state district judge sentenced Patton to a 180-day suspended
jail sentence, six months probation and a $1,000 fine. The
misdemeanor charge carried a penalty of as much as six months
in jail.
“One
of my strong committments to the office is open government,”
Abbott said. “Some people don’t know what open
government requires, and some do and choose not to comply.
23
NOVEMBER 2003
ISRAEL: Court Rejects Paper's Request for Data
Haaretz
(Israel) reports that the state comptroller
is not obligated to reveal, under the Freedom of Information
Law, material he receives in the course of his investigations,
a three-justice panel of the Supreme Court ruled.
Haaretz
had submitted a request to the state comptroller for information
pertaining to several matters discussed in the state comptroller's
reports. For example, a request was made for the names of
senior cabinet ministers, officials in government ministries
and local authorities who traveled abroad in violation of
regulations and proper procedures.
Other
information requested included: a list of public buildings
that were found to be structurally unsound and in danger
of collapsing; the names of non-profit organizations that
made illegal use of funds from bequeaths; organizations
that received excessive financial allocations from the Religious
Affairs and Interior ministries; salary figures of officials
at the Association for Soldiers' Welfare and at other public
groups that receive government funding.
22
NOVEMBER 2003
THAILAND: Anti-graft Agency Exempt from Official Information
Act?
The
Bangkok Postreports that the Official
Information Commission will seek a Constitution Court ruling
on whether the anti-graft agency was exempt from article
40 of the Official Information Act making it disclose state
information.
Rongpol
Charoenphan, Prime Minister's Office's deputy permanent
secretary, said the meeting, chaired by Deputy Prime Minister
Visanu Krue-ngam, discussed the National Counter Corruption
Commission's refusal to disclose information as requested.
22
NOVEMBER 2003
INDIA: Effectiveness of Indian Access to Information Law
The
Times of Indiareports on the Indian Right
to Information law suggesting that the law exists more in
name than in actual practice.
Empowered
by Right to Information Act, Ashfaque Ahmed wanted to know
how many cars were owned by his municipality. He applied
to the corporation for this basic bit of information. After
receiving no reply from the public information officer,
specially appointed for this purpose, he approached the
Lokayukta. Ahmed discovered that he was only one of 187
complainants to have approached the Lokayukta's office from
the time the act got presidential assent on August 11.
The
Lokayukta has been forced to reject 90 per cent of the appeals
on the grounds that the complaints were not accompanied
by an appropriate order from the concerned department stating
why the information sought cannot be made available."We
are not supposed to be in the picture unless the applicant
has an order in hand," said a Lokayukta official. "If
the information officer does not provide the information
sought, the applicant is supposed to appeal to the appellate
authority in that public office. Only if that officer rules
against giving information can the applicant approach us
with that order."
Unfortunately,
there is little or no public awareness about the act and
few know that they can ask for almost any kind of information
from any government office and get it, unless it is classified.
16
NOVEMBER 2003
AUSTRALIA: Treasurer Thwarts Bid for Key Files
The
Australian reports that Peter Costello
has invoked a rarely used suppression power in order to
suppress the release of key records reflecting directly
on his performance as Treasurer.
The
office of the Australian Government Solicitor, acting for
Mr Costello, advised that he wanted to personally vet documents
sought by this newspaper under federal Freedom of Information
legislation with a view to issuing a "conclusive certificate"
blocking their release.
The
Weekend Australian has spent more than 10 months attempting
to obtain, under FOI, publicly unavailable Treasury documents
concerning the operation of the first home buyers scheme,
income tax bracket creep and baseline information used in
the preparation of the intergenerational report on population
ageing.
One
of Australia's leading FOI experts, Rick Snell, of the University
of Tasmania, yesterday described Mr Costello's action as
outrageous.
16
NOVEMBER 2003
UK: Britain's Official Secrets Act
The
Guardian (UK) opines against Britain's
Official Secrets act, and its enforcement against Katharine
Gün, who was until last June a translator at the Government
Communication Headquarters.
Gün
was charged with the alleged disclosures of top-secret information
under the UK's Official Secrets Act. It has been reported
that the disclosures may relate to an article published
in the Guardian newspaper in March, revealing a secret attempt
by the United States to spy on delegations at the UN headquarters
in New York.
The
Observer showed that the Americans had asked British intelligence
to help in an illegal operation. The US wanted British assistance
in gathering information from countries whose votes were
needed for a second UN resolution to authorize war in Iraq.
12
NOVEMBER 2003
JAPAN: Supreme Court Overturns Disclosure Ruling
The
Asahi Shimbun (Japan) reports that the
Supreme Court has overturned a high court decision ordering
the disclosure of the names and titles of private citizens
wined and dined by the Osaka municipal government in the
late 1980s and early 1990s.
The
case involves a June 1992 request by the citizens group
Mihariban for records of the city's food-related expenditures
between July 1988 and March 1992-including meals provided
to attendees of meetings and conferences held by the city
government.
The
Supreme Court ruled that the names of private citizens in
nongovernmental positions should not be disclosed.
However,
the top court did send the case back to the Osaka High Court
on one point, arguing that civil servants and organization
representatives do not enjoy similar protection.
The
group was looking for information in connection with a scandal
involving city employees who falsified expense records by
reporting fictitious reasons for expenditures and inventing
dining partners to expropriate public money.
12
NOVEMBER 2003
AUSTRALIA/NEW ZEALAND: Alarm over Food Labeling Secrecy
According
to a press
release by New Zealand's Green Party, decisions
about what goes into Australians' and New Zealanders' food
and even what goes onto the label will continue to be made
in secret, as a result of an Ombudsman's ruling.
The
Ombudsman has upheld a refusal by the Minister of Food Safety
to release information under the Official Information Act
regarding any decisions made by the Australia New Zealand
Food Regulation Ministerial Council, on the grounds that
the council is an international organization.
The
ministerial council makes decisions on what is in our food:
what ingredients are legal and illegal; the level of pesticide
residues allowable; how food is produced and how food is
labeled.
It
is outrageous that food policy decisions are exempt from
the Official Information Act, and that the government is
colluding with the Australian Federal and State governments
in keeping this information secret from New Zealanders and
Australians," said Sue Kedgley, the Green Food Safety
spokesperson.
12
NOVEMBER 2003 TURKEY:
New FOI law posted, campaign underway for implementation
Turkey
joined the more than 50 countries with statutory rights
of access to government information when the Turkish parliament
voted unanimously on October 9 to enact a Right to Information
Law. With the approval of President Ahmet Necdet Sezer,
the new law was officially published on October 24, 2003.
Posted here are the English and Turkish texts of the law,
and a link to a newly-formed Campaign
for Freedom of Information in Turkey.
The
key dynamic in the government's drafting the law was Turkey's
aspiration to join the European Union, most of whose members
(except for Germany and Luxembourg) guarantee access to
government information by law. But the new law says little
or nothing about implementation, for which the Prime Ministry
is drafting regulations, or about definition of terms like
"secrecy," for which the Justice Ministry is drafting
new secrecy legislation.
Dr.
Yaman Akdeniz, law lecturer at the University of Leeds and
an organizer of the new Campaign for Freedom of Information
in Turkey, remarked that "Although it is a very important
first step towards openness and transparency, the limits
of this new right are not clearly defined by the new law...
So it remains to be seen how transparent the government
will be in Turkey."
