Thoughts on Civil Liberty

New evidence for us to explore the orgins of the world's first FOI legislation.

Finally, it is also an important right in a free society to be freely allowed to contribute to society’swell-being. However, if that is to occur, it must be possible for society’s state of affairs to becomeknown to everyone, and it must be possible for everyone to speak his mind freely about it. Wherethis is lacking, liberty is not worth its name. Matters of war and some foreign negotiations need to beconcealed for some time and not become known by many, but not on account of proper citizenshowever, but because of the enemies. Much less should peacetime matters and that which concernsdomestic wellbeing be withheld from inhabitants’ eyes. Otherwise, it might easily happen that onlyforeigners who wish harm find out all secrets through envoys and money, but the people of thecountry itself, who ideally would give useful advice, are ignorant of most things. On the other hand,when the whole country is known, at least the observant do see what benefits or harms, and discloseit to everybody, where there is freedom of the written word. Only then, can public deliberations besteered by truth and love for the fatherland, on whose common weal each and everyone depends. (From Thoughts on Civil Liberty)

The US got its new improved version of FOI legislation

Taken from Freedom of Information Organization

Washington, DC, January 18, 2008 - Two weeks after President Bush signed landmark legislation to reform the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) the first public discussion between officials and openness advocates was held this week, according to a new Web posting on freedominfo.org. The meeting focused on key provisions of the new law, including the creation of the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) to function as a FOIA ombudsman, the availability of attorneys fees for FOIA requesters, penalties for agency delay, and changes to the definition of "news media." The law, which passed both houses of Congress in December with bipartisan support after several years of negotiation, aims to fix some of the most persistent problems in the FOIA system, including excessive delay, lack of responsiveness, and litigation gamesmanship by federal agencies.

New Zealand and Australia experience a different path in FOI development

New Zealand and Australia experience a different path in FOI development, although both countries have a lot in common, such as ‘long term, stable liberal democracies with a strong Westminster system that heavily favored official secrecy’.[1] The path of New Zealand is a harmony one in which most of government officials and the public support this reform, while the path of Australia is a conflict one in which government’s attitude towards transparency is different from the public. The reasons behind this divergent path in Australia and New Zealand deserve more analysis.

---

[1] Rick Snell, ‘Freedom of Information Practices’ (2006) 13 Agenda 291, 293.

"> " title="permanent link">#

Australia Talks FOI

Taken from Open and Shut blog run by Peter Timmins

Australia Talks on Radio National included a segment on "Freedom of Information and Digital Policy" featuring Rick Snell of the University of Tasmania and Michael McKinnon, Freedom of Information Editor Channel 7. It provided a good overview of some of the current problems and issues regarding record keeping.

"> " title="permanent link">#

UK Freedom of Information Blog

UK Freedom of Information Blog
Maclean Bill fails to progress in Lords

David Maclean MP's Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill has so far not found a sponsor in the House of Lords and cannot now be introduced before the summer recess. If a sponsor is found, it is possible that the Bill could still be introduced in October. However, time is running out and the government would probably have to make time available for it, if it were to stand any chance of making progress. It seems unlikely that this would happen while the bill is in its current form. But it is conceivable that someone might still seek to take the bill forward in a highly truncated form (eg by proposing to restrict it to deal solely with MPs' correspondence on behalf of individual constituents).

"> " title="permanent link">#

Problems of FOI Implementation

There are many implementation problems arising from Shanghai and other countries as follows:

1. General problems

Conflicts laws

Culture of secrecy

2. Problems of citizens

Low public awareness

Lack knowledge

Limited use

3. Problems of the Government

Problems of handling requests

Low awareness by government officials

Lack resources

Lack good preparation

Lack incentives

"> " title="permanent link">#

All Governments, Authoritative, Democratic, or Somewhere in between, Have a Penchant for Secrecy

McCrann observes that ‘all governments, authoritative, democratic, or somewhere in between, have a penchant for secrecy’. [1] The US is not excluded from this tradition as it also experienced a long period of secrecy before its introduction of FOI legislation in 1966. This tradition can be tracked back to Washington administration in which government officials made ‘them almost an adversary to the people in the area of information’. Government information is withheld for various reasons, ‘ranging from national security concerns and embarrassment, to simple bad judgment or timidity’.[2]

"> " title="permanent link">#

---

[1] Grace-Ellen McCrann, ‘An Examination of the Conditions Surrounding the Passage of the 1966 US Freedom of Information Act’ (2007) 3 Open Government: a Journal on Freedom of Information 19.

Reasons for the Success of FOI in the US

Doty argues that the reasons for the success of FOI legislation in the US are as follows:

a tradition of self-rule, many policy instruments to open government to scrutiny, a cadre of well-educated and politically astute information professionals, a relatively free press, largely independent courts and prosecutors, dedicated FOIA personnel in Federal agencies, and a national tradition of openness in public communication.[1]

---

[1] Philip Doty, Freedom of Information in the United States: Historical Foundations and Current Trends (2000) The University of Texas at Austin< http://www.utexas.edu/research/tipi/reports2/foia_doty.pdf >at 6 May 2007.

"> " title="permanent link">#

The Realization of FOI

It should not be so optimistic to the rapid intake FOI legislation around the world. The establishment of FOI regime is hard and cannot be expected to be realized immediately as there are such a long period of secrecy and high degree of governments’ secret incentive. Moreover, FOI development should allow various models around the world based on the different degree of secrecy inherited in the history of each country. "> " title="permanent link">#

Freedom of Information in the United States after Sep. 11th : from the Perspective of National Security

After the aftermath of September 11th, the Bush Administration adopted many measures regarding national security which are contrary to freedom of information. Most obviously, the statutes and regulations in the Bush Administration provided for “sensitive but unclassified” and “critical infrastructure information”, but did not define them clearly. Accordingly, Freedom of Information Act has been prejudiced by the aim of anti-terrorism under the Bush Administration. The courts’ deference further exacerbates the adversely effect to the Freedom of Information Act. To summarize, national security and freedom of information can run together in some degree. #