NationStates Jolt Archive

The right to access official documents

A resolution to increase democratic freedoms

Category: The furtherment of democracy.
Strength: Strong

§ 1. Every citizen of an NSUN nation shall be entitled to have free access to official documents, in order to encourage the free exchange of opinion and the availability of comprehensive information.

§ 2. Document is understood to mean any written or pictorial matter or recording which may be read, listened to, or otherwise comprehended only using technical aids. It is official if it is held by a public authority.

A compilation of information taken from material recorded for automatic data processing is not regarded as being held by the authority if the compilation contains personal information and the authority is not authorised in law, or under a statutory instrument, to make the compilation available. Personal information is understood to mean any information which can be referred back directly or indirectly to a private person.

A letter or other communication which is directed in person to an official at a public authority is deemed to be an official document if it refers to a case or other matter falling within the authority’s purview, and if it is not intended for the addressee solely in his capacity as incumbent of another position.

§ 3 The right of access to official documents may be restricted only if restriction is necessary having regard to

* the security of the nation or its relations with another state or an international organisation;

* the central fiscal, monetary or currency policy of the nation;

* the inspection, control or other supervisory activities of a public authority;

* the interest of preventing or prosecuting crime;

* the economic interest of the public institutions;

* the protection of the personal or economic circumstances of private subjects;

* the preservation of animal or plant or any other species.

Any restriction of the right of access to official documents shall be scrupulously specified in a provision of a special act of law. The provisions of this paragraph notwithstanding, the local government authority may be empowered to permit the release of a particular document, having regard to the circumstances.

§ 4 The NSUN general assembly and any local government assembly vested with decision-making powers is equated with other public authorities for the purposes of this resolution.

§ 5 An official document to which the public has access shall be made available on request forthwith, or as soon as possible, at the place where it is held, and free of charge (fees may be put in place to cover the cost of materials, but the fees may not be a source of profit and must always be set with regard to the principle of equal access for all), to any person wishing to examine it, in such form that it can be read, listened to, or otherwise comprehended. A document may also be copied, reproduced, or used for sound transmission.

If a document cannot be made available without disclosure of such part of it as constitutes classified material, the rest of the document shall be made available to the applicant in the form of a transcript or copy.

§ 6 A request to examine an official document is made to the public authority which holds the document.

No public authority is permitted to inquire into a person’s identity on account of a request to examine an official document, or inquire into the purpose of his request, except insofar as such inquiry is necessary to enable the authority to judge whether there is any obstacle to release of the document.

A note concerning obstacles to the release of an official document may be made only on a document covered by a provision under paragraph 3. Such a note shall refer to the relevant provision.

§ 7 Should anyone other than a general assembly, i.e a parliament or other analogous body, or government reject a request to examine an official document, or release such a document with a provision restricting the applicant’s right to disclose its contents or otherwise dispose over it, the applicant may appeal against the decision before a court of law. Such an appeal shall always be examined promptly, and it shall be incumbent upon the party wishing to deny access to the document(s) to prove or otherwise give sufficient cause for the need to continued restricted access.

Rulings of continued restriction by the court shall be open to challenge at regular intervals, as the need for secrecy is bound to vary over time.

Any comments?

Nope: very good

Excellent proposal.
I would prefer criminal penalties against government officials who try to deny access and are overturned, but...


§ 3 The right of access to official documents may be restricted only if restriction is necessary having regard to

* the security of the nation or its relations with another state or an international organisation;

* the central fiscal, monetary or currency policy of the nation;

* the inspection, control or other supervisory activities of a public authority;

* the interest of preventing or prosecuting crime;

* the economic interest of the public institutions;

* the protection of the personal or economic circumstances of private subjects;

* the preservation of animal or plant or any other species.

I don't see the need to exclude fiscal,monetary, or currency policy.
I don't see the need to exclude the economic interest of the public institutions.

I stronly disagree with excluding the preservation of animal or plant "or any other species". Why should that be allowed to be a state secret? What other types of species might anyone want to preserve?

Excellent proposal.
I would prefer criminal penalties against government officials who try to deny access and are overturned, but...

Thank you. I didn't want to go into the whole quagmire that is trying to dictate to nations what sort of penalties they should have.

I don't see the need to exclude fiscal,monetary, or currency policy.

That is mostly there for governments to be able to keep certain economic moves secret. Take for instance a move for devaluation of currency, or discussions pertaining to altering rates by central banks, or discussions on selling off some state owned companies et cetera.

I don't see the need to exclude the economic interest of the public institutions.

Again, just a provision that means that governments could keep economic policies hidden from other governments who would like to undermine them. It is a tad superfluous with regard to the previous exemption, and I will consider altering or removing it in the final draft.

I stronly disagree with excluding the preservation of animal or plant "or any other species". Why should that be allowed to be a state secret?

Fass has, for instance, been trying to reintroduce wolves to their natural habitats - a move not popular with some locals, who have turned to poaching - and as such the government keeps track of the herds' locations and migratory patterns. Other nations have other, highly sought-after endangered species that they need to protect. This way the animals' whereabouts and other sensitive details about them can be kept hidden if the individual government sees the need for it.

What other types of species might anyone want to preserve?

There are nations in the NS universe who have populations of magical creatures, or aliens, or, well, any sort of being you can imagine. This is put there out of respect for them.

There is no citizenship requirement, is there?

Therefore, I'm going to send in a small army of agents to each of my enemies, and demand copies of ALL pointless, irrelevant, and otherwise public information that your nation has every produced. I expect that each of my thousands of agents will need a fleet of tractor-trailers to haul it all away. I'll keep doing this until your nation is bankrupt from filling Freedom of Information requests.

Or you could put in something about 'reasonable access'; or define 'official documents' a bit more clearly.

There is no citizenship requirement, is there?

Therefore, I'm going to send in a small army of agents to each of my enemies, and demand copies of ALL pointless, irrelevant, and otherwise public information that your nation has every produced. I expect that each of my thousands of agents will need a fleet of tractor-trailers to haul it all away. I'll keep doing this until your nation is bankrupt from filling Freedom of Information requests.

Or you could put in something about 'reasonable access'; or define 'official documents' a bit more clearly.

Or you could just charge for hard copies of documents over a certain length. Free access could still be provided though for everyone, just not to take away.

There is no citizenship requirement, is there?

Therefore, I'm going to send in a small army of agents to each of my enemies, and demand copies of ALL pointless, irrelevant, and otherwise public information that your nation has every produced. I expect that each of my thousands of agents will need a fleet of tractor-trailers to haul it all away. I'll keep doing this until your nation is bankrupt from filling Freedom of Information requests.

Or you could put in something about 'reasonable access'; or define 'official documents' a bit more clearly.

I thought a citizenship requirement was built into the text, what with the opening line, but since I don't mention anywhere that foreign citizens must be granted the same access as domestic citizens, you could easily refuse access to foreign nationals to the documents covered by the third paragraph.

Also, it is elaborated that the documents be handed over "as soon as possible" - and that can become a very long time if the few people/librarians concerned with working on handing out requested documents at the affected institutions are inundated with pointless requests (that's also why there is a possibility of allowing the copying of already handed out information, so that it can be spread somewhat memetically).

Also, if you make the documents available electronically, you needn't even have physical places that can be tied up by such attempts - just refer to a web page or some similar device. Or use robots. Or whatever you have at your disposal.

As you see, there are several firewalls that can be built into the system to counteract such malicious behaviour as you have suggested. That's also why the resolution doesn't go into details as to how the information has to be handed out, other than that it has to be legible/comprehensible.

I thought a citizenship requirement was built into the text, what with the opening line, but since I don't mention anywhere that foreign citizens must be granted the same access as domestic citizens, you could easily refuse access to foreign nationals to the documents covered by the third paragraph.
It just states that
Every citizen of an NSUN shall be entitled to have free access to official documents, in order to encourage the free exchange of opinion and the availability of comprehensive information.
Perhaps change it to
Every citizen of an NSUN nation shall be entitled to have free access to the official documents of their nation...
That should clear up any difficulties of that kind.

Or you could just charge for hard copies of documents over a certain length. Free access could still be provided though for everyone, just not to take away.

Good idea! I've added the possibility to add fees to cover the cost of materials to the resolution.

Please keep the suggestions coming!

That should clear up any difficulties of that kind.

But then you would need to check the citizenship status of the applicants, which would make the paragraph on anonymity of the applicants pointless.

The slight risk of abuse (which can be easily countered, as I've mentioned) is an acceptable one, when contrasted with the importance of being able to be anonymous when it comes to requesting documents, don't you think?

But then you would need to check the citizenship status of the applicants, which would make the paragraph on anonymity of the applicants pointless.

The slight risk of abuse (which can be easily countered, as I've mentioned) is an acceptable one, when contrasted with the importance of being able to be anonymous when it comes to requesting documents, don't you think?
I'm not sure I do.
Why is anonymity important?

Lessee, my usual approach to analyzing proposals involves thinking about how the scummiest person I know (me) would go about subverting them. As it turns out, a citizenship requirement would be pretty easy for me to circumvent. The anonymity requirement would be even easier for my government to circumvent.

The more important question is why I'd be interested in publics works subsidies of some other nation. Or why my government would care which citizen wanted documents about our own public works subsidies.

OK, only took a couple minutes to come up with those answers.

YGSM opposes the anonymity requirement, and demands that it be explicitly stated in the text that people only have the right to documents from their own government.

I think I could make it difficult for hostile governments to get the information they need if you made those two changes.

I agree that a citizenship requirement is reasonable.

Is there any kind of document NSUN wouldn't want given out to rouge nations?

Oh! That reminds me. Computer source code is a document.

This proposal needs an explicit exception for computer software, scripts, etc.

Excellent proposal.
I would prefer criminal penalties against government officials who try to deny access and are overturned, but...


I don't see the need to exclude fiscal,monetary, or currency policy.
I don't see the need to exclude the economic interest of the public institutions.

I stronly disagree with excluding the preservation of animal or plant "or any other species". Why should that be allowed to be a state secret? What other types of species might anyone want to preserve?

Yes, please publish all your financial data - we want to break you like a walnut.

And preservation is international studies, we can see this exclusion.

We would suggest that financial and other temporally sensitive data be released, but only after its usefulness has been removed.

Is there any kind of document NSUN wouldn't want given out to rouge nations?

Oh! That reminds me. Computer source code is a document.

This proposal needs an explicit exception for computer software, scripts, etc.

"National Security". See it?

I'm not sure I do.
Why is anonymity important?

Personal integrity.

Such a principle of transparency that this proposal would try to instate has as one of its core strengths that people get more insight into what the government is doing and thus gain the possibility of acting as a "check and balance" of their own, even between electoral periods.

It would thus be very tempting for some, less freedom loving, governments among the NSUN members to keep a tab on who is reading what and to try to persecute those who cause "trouble" by exposing government wrong-doing. Anonymity is an important way in which the citizen is given protection from such actions. If reprisals from the government were a possibility for checking certain materials out, who would do it?

Lessee, my usual approach to analysing proposals involves thinking about how the scummiest person I know (me) would go about subverting them. As it turns out, a citizenship requirement would be pretty easy for me to circumvent. The anonymity requirement would be even easier for my government to circumvent.

It is clearly stated that the government is barred from inquiring into an applicant's identity. No matter what you do, you would be barred from finding out who checked out what.

YGSM opposes the anonymity requirement, and demands that it be explicitly stated in the text that people only have the right to documents from their own government.

I believe that this would cause unnecessary restrictions of the freedoms that this resolution is all about. The citizenship requirement would only serve to erode the right to anonymity and be a nuisance not to foreign nationals, but domestic ones, if applied across the board. That is why paragraph 3 exists - to give governments the ability to protect certain sensitive information, but not all information.

I think I could make it difficult for hostile governments to get the information they need if you made those two changes.

As I've pointed out, such changes would give no added security, except for an illusionary one, and have as a consequence dire nuisance to ordinary citizens.

Is there any kind of document NSUN wouldn't want given out to rouge nations?

Oh! That reminds me. Computer source code is a document.

This proposal needs an explicit exception for computer software, scripts, etc.

As Vastiva points out, if the source code is of such importance as to cause a risk to national security or economy, you may use the third paragraph to restrict it. It would be an excellent example of an application of the exemption that reads "the economic interest of the public institutions", because if the software company is state owned, this exemption could be used to conceal its trade secrets.

You are saying that people have access to government documents. That sounds silly, as it could put national security at risk. Some information has to remain outside the public domain.

As Vastiva points out, if the source code is of such importance as to cause a risk to national security or economy, you may use the third paragraph to restrict it. It would be an excellent example of an application of the exemption that reads "the economic interest of the public institutions", because if the software company is state owned, this exemption could be used to conceal its trade secrets.
By providing source codes to particular websites/databases (even if said websites/databases were not of a sensitive nature) it would be much easier for hackers to get in and corrupt the system, and perhaps even gain access to a national computer server. Not sure if this is covered elsewhere, but I thought I'd mention it, as this is what I thought YGSM meant initially.

(random comment: it's very odd referring to Asshelmetta as YGSM ... I feel like I'm talking to a completely different person almost. Okay, back on topic now)

You are saying that people have access to government documents. That sounds silly, as it could put national security at risk. Some information has to remain outside the public domain.

I don't mean to come off as bitchy, but please read the draft before commenting:

"§ 3 The right of access to official documents may be restricted only if restriction is necessary having regard to

* the security of the nation or its relations with another state or an international organisation;"

By providing source codes to particular websites/databases (even if said websites/databases were not of a sensitive nature) it would be much easier for hackers to get in and corrupt the system, and perhaps even gain access to a national computer server. Not sure if this is covered elsewhere, but I thought I'd mention it, as this is what I thought YGSM meant initially.

Source codes to websites cannot be hidden - they are visible as they have to be. I don't know what you're pointing at.

Also, the open source community itself is a wonderful example to show that open source doesn't prove an increased threat to security - on the contrary, it seems to be better. But that's off-topic.

I believe that paragraph 3 is sufficient to deal with your concerns, but invite you to try to persuade me otherwise, if you are able to.

I still don't see what possible benefit widespread access to government documents could have. Enlighten me.

I still don't see what possible benefit widespread access to government documents could have. Enlighten me.

Simply, the furtherment of democracy. It gives people a way to supervise the governments. It is an extremely effective instrument against fraud and corruption.

OOC: A principle of transparency is available in multiple RL countries, most notably the Scandinavian ones, Sweden being the one with the furthest reaching law (by which this draft has been inspired) that dates back to 1766. It is a vital part of democratic tradition here, where people regularly get bent politicians sacked by inquiring into paper trails they leave when doing something wrong.

IC: The principle here is that the government should be held accountable to the people, and that it should thus not be allowed to hide from them through some secrecy.

(random comment: it's very odd referring to Asshelmetta as YGSM ... I feel like I'm talking to a completely different person almost. Okay, back on topic now)
Thanks for noticing ;)
Nothing I can do about it, I'm afraid.

I used to sign some of Asshelmetta's posts as YGSM, when I remembered. YGSM was officially the name of the ambassador, before the country got destroyed and YGSM became a nation in my own right.

As I've pointed out, such changes would give no added security, except for an illusionary one, and have as a consequence dire nuisance to ordinary citizens.
No you didn't.
Or if you did, I missed it.

It occurs to me that theres a loop hole whereby a document can be classified as one of the following, and therefore never released, Legally.§ 3 The right of access to official documents may be restricted only if restriction is necessary having regard to
* the security of the nation or its relations with another state or an international organisation;

* the central fiscal, monetary or currency policy of the nation;

* the inspection, control or other supervisory activities of a public authority;

* the interest of preventing or prosecuting crime;

* the economic interest of the public institutions;

* the protection of the personal or economic circumstances of private subjects;

* the preservation of animal or plant or any other species.


Should there be a time scale inserted? And maybe a review of older classified documents by a group who can decide independantly if the classified documents still hold relevance and if they should be declassified for release.

Thanks for noticing ;)
Nothing I can do about it, I'm afraid.

I used to sign some of Asshelmetta's posts as YGSM, when I remembered. YGSM was officially the name of the ambassador, before the country got destroyed and YGSM became a nation in my own right.

YGSM of YGSM - wow. Talk about an ego! ;)

It occurs to me that theres a loop hole whereby a document can be classified as one of the following, and therefore never released, Legally.


Should there be a time scale inserted? And maybe a review of older classified documents by a group who can decide independantly if the classified documents still hold relevance and if they should be declassified for release.

It is our opinion that "releasability" should be left to National Soverignty, as each nations information may be different. For example, Vastiva has oil exploration reports going back to the early 1600s. We still consider them as classified information, as they are part of our source material and not all sites have been fully explored. On the other hand, population reports from the same period are in public domain.

No you didn't.
Or if you did, I missed it.

I figured it a va-de-soi.

A citizenship requirement would work like this:

1. Person demands to see a document.
2. Person is forced to reveal identity to prove citizenship.
3. Citizenship proved, the access to documents cannot be denied.
4. Said citizen takes the document, copies it and distributes it.
5. Foreign national gets to see the document without much hassle in the end, after all.

As seen, a citizenship requirement gives no added security, but instead all it does is erode anonymity, of which I have already explained the importance.

It occurs to me that theres a loop hole whereby a document can be classified as one of the following, and therefore never released, Legally.


Should there be a time scale inserted? And maybe a review of older classified documents by a group who can decide independantly if the classified documents still hold relevance and if they should be declassified for release.

As Vastiva points out, time scales are different for different nations and IMHO are best left to national sovereignty.

But you do have a point about the possibility. Maybe an extension of the right to appeal before a court of law could be detailed so that the burden of proof is solely vested upon whoever wants to keep a document hidden? In that case, if an old classified document is demanded by an applicant, it would be up to the government to prove that the secrecy is still warranted. If they cannot give sufficient motivation, then the document would have to be released.

I'm thinking an addendum that would go something like

"Such an appeal shall always be examined promptly, and it shall be incumbent upon the party wishing to deny access to the document(s) to prove or otherwise give sufficient cause for the need to continued restricted access.

Rulings of continued restriction by the court shall be open to challenge at regular intervals, as the need for secrecy is bound to vary over time."

Better?

We defy this outrageous interference in our governmental policy. The Goa’uld shall not be subject to such farcical interference. We are better than the people we rule, and this is why we are their rulers. We should not be expected to bend over backward to make such data available to them, indeed, it is best that we keep what we know about the common subject to ourselves, so that the common subject has no idea what is kept on them.

Furthermore, this is merely another effort to make the struggling economy of Lord Atum bear the burden of additional bureaucracy.

- Lord Jehvah, Lord Atum’s Representative to the UN

Catherine sighed, peering at Lord Jehvah, her rather ugly face regarding him silently. As if their citizens could read or interpret the information... She then turned her attention back to the proposal at hand. "Well..." She read through it, again, and again, paying special attention to the third paragraph. Hummm... This works. "Oh, one thing. I would suggest changing the fourth paragraph, as the NSUN, not be a local, nor national government, should be explicitly exempted from this, seeing as it has no citizens that could profit from this resolution, no?"

Simply, the furtherment of democracy. It gives people a way to supervise the governments. It is an extremely effective instrument against fraud and corruption.

OOC: A principle of transparency is available in multiple RL countries, most notably the Scandinavian ones, Sweden being the one with the furthest reaching law (by which this draft has been inspired) that dates back to 1766. It is a vital part of democratic tradition here, where people regularly get bent politicians sacked by inquiring into paper trails they leave when doing something wrong.

IC: The principle here is that the government should be held accountable to the people, and that it should thus not be allowed to hide from them through some secrecy.

I have to say that, I really don't think it would guard against corruption and fraud. The resolution still allows for the government to hold back any document they feel necessary to national security. In any event, with this sort of power, any corrupt or fraudulent government would still be able to, and would, cover up any document that links the government to fraud and corruption.

Documents would simply not be released, on the grounds that they would endanger national security. An easy loop-hole, don't you think?

I apologise if this subject has already been asked, or is resolved by another resolution, or indeed whether it's already been considered whithin the draft and I just missed it, but shouldn't there be safeguards to prevent the access of government documents pertaining to an individual (other than criminal records) bieng examined by those other then the individual in question and those with authorisation. If, for example, Cobdenia started documenting all the financial transactions of our citizens there must be some safeguard to prevent any random citizen from accessing it and using it to their advantage through identity theft, etc at the expense of the individual the document pertains to. There must also be safeguards preventing those who work with such documents from accessing such information without authority, which must ge granted by a duly appointed person (such as a judge or a minister) on a case by case basis.

That would be rather like a data protection act.

Well, it would save having two resolutions if this one included clauses incorporating data protection, and I feel no-one could have anything against such ammendments

I apologise if this subject has already been asked, or is resolved by another resolution, or indeed whether it's already been considered whithin the draft and I just missed it, but shouldn't there be safeguards to prevent the access of government documents pertaining to an individual (other than criminal records) bieng examined by those other then the individual in question and those with authorisation.

"The right of access to official documents may be restricted only if restriction is necessary having regard to
[...]
* the protection of the personal or economic circumstances of private subjects"

Documents would simply not be released, on the grounds that they would endanger national security. An easy loop-hole, don't you think?

I'm gonna come across as bitchy, but I will urge the reading of the draft yet again.

"Any restriction of the right of access to official documents shall be scrupulously specified in a provision of a special act of law. The provisions of this paragraph notwithstanding, the local government authority may be empowered to permit the release of a particular document, having regard to the circumstances."

"[...]the applicant may appeal against the decision before a court of law. Such an appeal shall always be examined promptly, and it shall be incumbent upon the party wishing to deny access to the document(s) to prove or otherwise give sufficient cause for the need to continued restricted access."

"Oh, one thing. I would suggest changing the fourth paragraph, as the NSUN, not be a local, nor national government, should be explicitly exempted from this, seeing as it has no citizens that could profit from this resolution, no?"

It is exactly because of that, that it has its own special paragraph. The NSUN shall be as open as its members, and all citizens in NSUN nations should have equal access to NSUN documents as well.