Citizens' Right to Know

[John Young]

The New York Times, June 1, 1999, p. A22.

Editorial

The Citizens' Right to Know 

After years of talk from the Labor Party about ending 
Britain's culture of secrecy, Tony Blair's Government has 
just proposed a sadly inadequate law governing the 
disclosure of government information. In effect, Britain 
is bucking a trend that has helped citizens elsewhere 
learn what their governments are doing and prevent 
official misconduct.

In other nations, freedom of information laws have improved 
the policy-making process and provided a check against 
government abuses. The laws, most of which have been adopted 
in the past quarter-century, emphasize that government
information belongs to the people. They accompany other 
transparency laws, which require Web-site publication of 
government data or publication of proposed laws in documents 
such as the Federal Register or Congressional Record. Together
these laws have nourished democracy by restricting government 
powers to withhold important information.

Sweden approved the first freedom of information law in 1766, 
saying that anyone could go to a government agency and look 
up documents in the files. Today at least 15 countries and 
Hong Kong have such laws, including Hungary and several 
Western European and Asian countries and former British 
colonies. South Africa's new democratic government put freedom 
of information in the country's new Constitution, and is now 
facing the challenge of financing a law and developing ways 
for citizens who cannot read or write to make oral
requests. Japan is the latest to pass a freedom of information 
law, spurred in part by its Health Ministry's slowness in 
dealing with H.I.V.-tainted blood products, a scandal in which 
at least 400 people died. 

The United States passed a weak law in 1966, but it was greatly 
strengthened in 1974, after Watergate. It requires government 
agencies to publish many kinds of information, and allows 
anyone in the world to request the release of specific documents. 
The government may withhold several types of information,
including material that violates privacy or damages the national 
security.

Mr. Blair's new bill is weaker than previous proposals that both 
of Britain's major parties have made, and in some areas even 
softens current disclosure laws. It gives public officials the 
right to withhold information that relates to the formulation of 
government policy, material they believe could prejudice the 
workings of government, and even any request they consider 
"vexatious."

No law is perfect. America's Freedom of Information Act works best 
for the businesses that are its biggest users and have long 
relationships with the agencies they query. Industries the 
government regulates, like pharmaceuticals, want early information 
about new standards and whatever the government can tell them about 
the competition. Some agencies with crucial information, such as 
the Central Intelligence Agency and the Pentagon, can take five 
years to respond to a disclosure request. Agencies routinely 
underfinance their information offices, and suffer no penalties for 
defying the disclosure law. They also abuse the permitted 
exceptions, using them to hide embarrassing behavior. 

Despite these flaws, however, Americans have been able to use 
freedom of information laws to learn about matters as diverse as the 
Bay of Pigs, housing discrimination and safety problems at nuclear 
plants. Many government officials admit that even though they resent 
disclosure provisions, the laws have given citizens a fundamental 
tool to expose and restrain government arrogance.

-----

Archived at: http://jya.com/rtk.htm