The right to know – a manual to support your delivery of the freedom of information act 2000The right to know – a manual to support your delivery of the freedom of information act 2000 Dilys Jones and GiffordChristine (Eds)Pavilion164pp,£1501 84196 112 41841961124

2005 ◽  
Vol 20 (13) ◽  
pp. 36-36
Author(s):  
Marc Cornock
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Right To Know ◽  
Freedom Of Information Act ◽  
The Right To Know ◽  
The Right

The Right to Know in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, and the United States

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
The United States ◽  
White Paper ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Right To Know ◽  
Freedom Of Information Act ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Right To Know ◽  
The Right

It was acknowledged in the 1997 White Paper Your Right To Know that the United Kingdom could learn much from the experience of other countries with established FOI regimes. The draftsman of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 had regard to the statutory schemes of five such countries whose jurisprudence has precedent value in our courts: Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, and the United States. Chapter 25 looks at their different approaches to the fundamental elements of any FOI regime, and gives examples of how their courts have interpreted and applied the respective statutes. The chapter notes common themes and recurrent sources of controversy, notably delays in responding to requests, charges for access, and the position of affected third parties. It traces how the legislation in each country has been adapted over the years, and where there is pressure for yet further reforms.

EU Citizens’ Right to Know: The Improbable Adoption of a European Freedom of Information Act

1999 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 303-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulf Öberg
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Public Affairs ◽  
Public Access ◽  
Open Government ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Right To Know ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Freedom Of Information Act ◽  
The Right

There is without doubt a radical difference between the culture of open government in Sweden and the until recently prevailing culture of secrecy in Britain and within the European Union. From a classic British sceptic’s perspective, “public access to official documents is deemed unnecessary, since British democracy has functioned for so long without it”. The British “have always relied heavily, although not always successfully, on the concept of ‘ministerial responsibility’ to Parliament in order to secure public trust in government”. The mainstream of eighteenth-century British political thought held that the nation’s political well-being required the foundation of an informed gentleman citizenry. By the middle decades of the eighteenth-century, the movement away from the idea of a citizenry composed exclusively of gentlemen was firmly established on both sides of the Atlantic. It became increasingly acknowledged that men of the “meaner sort” should have the right to hold opinions on public affairs and ought to be allowed to protest against governments and laws they deemed improper.

scholarly journals Reclaim the right to know toki and locate it online

2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 10-14
Author(s):  
Lisa Williams-Lahari
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Right To Know ◽  
The Public ◽  
Talking Heads ◽  
The Right To Know ◽  
Governance Process ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

Commentary: A Cook Islands proverb goes like this: Taraia to toki, ei toki tarai enua – ‘Sharpen your adze, the adze to carve nations.’ Applying the proverb in this context, the toki/adze can be seen as the media. The right to know is the tool which keeps the adze strong and effective. When the toki is well prepared for its work, the impact on public debate and protection of media freedoms is strongest. The diversity of news outlets and ‘talking heads’ in the public domain helps foster a sense of public participation; and ownership of the governance process. When the adze is blunted by lack of Freedom of Information legislation, or by the failure of media workers to pressure for the public interest and the right to know, we see the deadening impacts that many of us can attest to in our countries.

Transparency as a Human Right

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Birkinshaw
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Right To Know ◽  
Government Information ◽  
Human Right ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Right To Know ◽  
The Right

‘Transparency’, ‘openness’, and access to government-held information are widely applauded as remedies for the deficiencies and operations of government where government claims to be democratic but falls short of its rhetoric. This chapter examines whether transparency is a human right, focusing on one of its specific features: access to government information, or freedom of information (FOI). It explains what is meant by FOI and argues that within the framework of internationally agreed concepts of human rights, FOI deserves to be listed with those rights. Not only is FOI instrumental in realizing other human rights such as freedom of speech and access to justice, or other desiderata such as accountability, it is intrinsically important: the right to know how government operates on our behalf. The chapter also discusses constitutionalism and the struggle for information in the United Kingdom.

EU Citizens’ Right to Know: The Improbable Adoption of a European Freedom of Information Act

1999 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 303-328
Author(s):  
Ulf Öberg
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Public Affairs ◽  
Public Access ◽  
Open Government ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Right To Know ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Freedom Of Information Act ◽  
The Right

There is without doubt a radical difference between the culture of open government in Sweden and the until recently prevailing culture of secrecy in Britain and within the European Union. From a classic British sceptic’s perspective, “public access to official documents is deemed unnecessary, since British democracy has functioned for so long without it”. The British “have always relied heavily, although not always successfully, on the concept of ‘ministerial responsibility’ to Parliament in order to secure public trust in government”. The mainstream of eighteenth-century British political thought held that the nation’s political well-being required the foundation of an informed gentleman citizenry. By the middle decades of the eighteenth-century, the movement away from the idea of a citizenry composed exclusively of gentlemen was firmly established on both sides of the Atlantic. It became increasingly acknowledged that men of the “meaner sort” should have the right to hold opinions on public affairs and ought to be allowed to protest against governments and laws they deemed improper.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document