Revisiting Open Government: Recent Developments in Shifting the Boundaries of Government Secrecy under Public Interest Immunity and Freedom of Information Law

1995 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 226-276
Author(s):  
Anne Cossins
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Open Government ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Disclosure Of Information ◽  
Information Law ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Satisfactory State ◽  
Government Secrecy ◽  
Democratic Norms ◽  
Official Information

Australian law regulating the use and disclosure of official information is in a far from satisfactory state. It suffers from both obscurity and untoward complexity … [and i]t is ill-suited both to contemporary conditions of government and to prevailing constitutional and democratic norms … Notwithstanding the progressive introduction of Freedom of Information regimes in Australia, we have by no means reached — or sought to reach —the position where … the free use and disclosure of information is the norm and secrecy the exception … While the balance is now changing, and desirably so, secrecy endures as the primary obligation and openness the exception…1

scholarly journals Government Secrecy and Security Classifications in the Context of Integrity Management in Malaysia

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (Number 1) ◽  
pp. 113-124
Author(s):  
Noreha Hashim
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Exploratory Research ◽  
Government Information ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Government Secrecy ◽  
Personal Interests ◽  
Official Information

Secrecy in government is almost always perceived as being antithetical to accountability and transparency in the conduct of democratic government. However, it is undisputable that government secrecy is practiced the world over because it is indispensable to state security, international relations, public and personal interests. Hence, democratic governments must perform a delicate balancing act between openness and confidentiality in the handling of official information. Indeed, effective governance requires various legal regimes that control government information through security classifications and impose punishments on offenders. This paper aims to address the dearth of research on government secrecy and security classifications in the context of integrity management in Malaysia. Integrity management encompasses not only the exercise of moral values by public institutions and officials but also the integrity of processes and procedures that uphold the integrity of governance. This exploratory research uses qualitative content analysis of data gathered from official government publications and websites, relevant documents and course notes, as well as interviews and correspondence with field experts. The inferences derived from themes and categories generated have resulted in several important findings. First, the 1972 Official Secrets Act (OSA) plays a significant role as part of a plethora of statutes and ethical codes that are indispensable to upholding government integrity. Second, weaknesses in balancing between openness and confidentiality when handling official information are attributed to organizational failure, public officials’ lack of ethical values, comprehension and training. The challenge is to ensure that the OSA is not used for cover-ups of corruption, ethical misconducts and administrative transgressions while the proposed Freedom of Information Act does not lead to a culture of blaming and mistrust that could lead to the paralysis of government and governance.

The Secrecy and Freedom of Information Debates in Britain

1982 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 293-311
Author(s):  
Rosamund Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Disclosure Of Information ◽  
Nigerian Civil War ◽  
Unauthorized Disclosure ◽  
Official Information

RECENT DEBATES IN BRITAIN ABOUT SECRECY IN CENTRAL government have become immersed in the traditional tension between espionage and secrecy. Espionage concerns spies and others who intend to help an enemy and who deliberately harm the security of the nation. Secrecy means ‘the compulsory withholding of knowledge reinforced by the prospect of sanctions for disclosure’. Leakage of official information may involve persons having no intention of damaging the nation. However, harm to the country may ensue from information getting into the wrong hands, whether by espionage or leakage. Experience of this tension in practice was a major factor leading to the enactment of the Official Secrets Act 1911, with section 1 covering espionage and section 2 unauthorized disclosure of information, with the risk of prosecution for either offence. Journalists in particular are aggrieved that they may be subject to prosecution under the Act used to charge spies and traitors. Jonathan Aitken, one of the journalists prosecuted in 1970 under section 2 of the 1911 Act over extracts from a British diplomat's report leaked to the Sunday Telegraph about the Nigerian civil war, was acquitted and published his own version of the Nigerian case in his book Officially Secret (1971), which heavily criticized the Official Secrets Act.

Presidential Privilege and the Freedom of Information Act

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin M. Baron
Keyword(s):  
Social Learning ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
Public Information ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Freedom Of Information Act ◽  
Contemporary Politics ◽  
Government Secrecy

Executive privilege (EP) as a political tool has created a grey area of constitutional power between the legislative and executive branches. By focusing on the post-WWII political usage of executive privilege, this research utilizes a social learning perspective to examine the power dynamics between Congress and the president when it comes to government secrecy and public information. Social learning provides the framework to understand how the Cold War's creation of the modern American security state led to a paradigm shift in the executive branch. This shift altered the politics of the presidency and impacted relations with Congress through extensive use of EP and denial of congressional requests for information. When viewed through a social learning lens, the institutional politics surrounding the development of the Freedom of Information Act is intricately entwined with EP as a political power struggle of action-reaction between the executive and legislative branches. Using extensive archival research, this historical analysis examines the politics surrounding the modern use of executive privilege from Truman through Nixon as an action-reaction of checks on power from the president and Congress, where each learns and responds based on the others previous actions. The use of executive privilege led to the Freedom of Information Act showing how policy can serve as a congressional check on executive power, and how the politics surrounding this issue influence contemporary politics.

scholarly journals The Norwegian Noark Model Requirements for EDRMS in the context of open government and access to governmental information

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Olav Hagen Sataslåtten
Keyword(s):  
Open Government ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Records Management ◽  
Electronic Documents ◽  
The Relationship

This article analyses the relationship between the Norwegian Noark Standard and the concepts of Open Government and Freedom of Information. Noark is the Norwegian model requirements for Electronic Documents and Records Management Systems (EDRMS). It was introduced in 1984, making it not only the world’s first model requirement for EDRMS, but also, through the introduction of versions from Noark 1 to the present Noark 5, internationally the model requirement with the longest continuation of implementation.

Open Government

2021 ◽  
pp. 667-682
Author(s):  
Gary Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
International Monetary Fund ◽  
European Central Bank ◽  
Open Government ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Central ◽  
Public Policy Decisions ◽  
The International Monetary Fund ◽  
Opening Up

Since Irish independence in 1922, governance structures have been excessively secretive. Political and civil service elites operated on a presumption of secrecy and a principle that the public did not need to know about decisions being taken in their name. In the last two decades, a number of policy innovations have gone some way towards providing for a more open polity. These include Ombudsman, regulation of lobbying, and freedom of information legislation, enacted over concerns about payments to politicians and a series of catastrophic public policy decisions that led to the bailout of the Irish economy by the International Monetary Fund, the European Commission, and the European Central Bank. This chapter assesses the importance of the principle of open government in modern Irish politics. It examines the nature of secrecy, assesses the tentative opening up of government since the 1980s, and analyses the open government proposals introduced since 2011.

Eisenhower’s executive privilege and the public interest

2019 ◽  
pp. 54-84
Author(s):  
Kevin M. Baron
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Government Information ◽  
Executive Orders ◽  
White House ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Creation

This chapter delves into the depths of one of the most important developments within modern American politics, the creation and institutionalization of executive privilege. In facing a fervent Congress in the grips of McCarthyism, Eisenhower issued a letter denying testimony to the Senate for the Army-McCarthy hearings. His letter included a memo from Attorney General Brownell that claimed the president had an inherent constitutional privilege to deny information to Congress or the public if it was in the public interest and for national security. This action institutionalized the Cold War Paradigm in the executive branch and created an extra-constitutional power for the president. Eisenhower issued several executive orders concerning classification and public dissemination of government information, along with the creation of the Office of Strategic Information (OSI) within the Commerce Department to oversee these policies. Eisenhower claimed historic precedent to justify his inherent constitutional power, regardless, it showed a learned response that changed executive power. Congress would respond in 1955 by creating the Special Subcommittee on Government Information chaired by Rep. John Moss, given jurisdiction for oversight on all executive branch information policies and practices. With the issue of freedom of information institutionalized in Congress, a 12-year legislative power struggle would unfold between Congress and the White House ending with the passage of the Freedom of Information Act in 1966.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document