NationStates Jolt Archive


Submitted: Access to Official Documents

Fass
26-03-2005, 21:10
Access to Official Documents

A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.

Category: The Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Fass

Description: § 1. Every citizen shall be entitled to free access to official documents, in order to encourage the free exchange of opinion and the availability of information.

§ 2. A document is any written or pictorial matter or recording which may be read, listened to, or otherwise comprehended. It is official if held by a public authority.

A letter or other communication directed in person to an official at a public authority is seen as an official document if it refers to a case or 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 with regard to

* the security of the nation or its relations with another state or international organisation;
* the central fiscal, monetary or currency policy of the nation;
* the inspection, control or supervisory activities of a public authority;
* the interest of preventing or prosecuting crime;
* the protection of personal or economic circumstances of private subjects;
* the preservation of animal, plant or any other species.

Any restriction of the right of access to official documents shall be scrupulously specified in 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 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, free of charge (fees may be enacted to cover costs of material, but not at a profit and they must be set with regard to equal access for all), to any person wishing to examine it, in such form that it can be read, listened to, or otherwise comprehended. It may also be copied, reproduced, or used for transmission.

If it 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 authority which holds it.

No public authority is allowed 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 if there is any obstacle to release of the document.

A note concerning obstacles to the release of a document may be made only one covered by a provision under §3. It shall refer to the relevant provision.

§ 7 Should anyone other than a general assembly, i.e. parliament, reject a request to examine an official document, or release such a document with a restriction of the applicant’s right to disclose its contents or otherwise dispose over it, the applicant may appeal the decision in a court of law. The appeal shall be examined promptly, and it shall be incumbent upon the party wishing to deny access to the document 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.

It's the first submission and I'm just floating it this time, to see how much "spontaneous" support there is for this version, shortened to comply with the 3500 character limit. Comments are appreciated, as always.
DemonLordEnigma
27-03-2005, 00:39
Hmm. Not bad. Still don't see the necessity.
Venerable libertarians
27-03-2005, 06:16
Congrats!

Well researched, Presented brilliantly.

Alas, am I convinced of the Reqiurement? NO!
Krioval
27-03-2005, 06:37
Approved. While I share concerns as to its necessity, I find the premise strong and am certainly willing to encourage further debate on the subject.
Vastiva
27-03-2005, 06:40
It's the first submission and I'm just floating it this time, to see how much "spontaneous" support there is for this version, shortened to comply with the 3500 character limit. Comments are appreciated, as always.

Oooh, goody - an open door.


Access to Official Documents

A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.

Category: The Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Fass

Boilerplate.



Description: § 1. Every citizen shall be entitled to free access to official documents, in order to encourage the free exchange of opinion and the availability of information.

Citizen of what?



§ 2. A document is any written or pictorial matter or recording which may be read, listened to, or otherwise comprehended. It is official if held by a public authority.

"Public Authority" needs defining.



A letter or other communication directed in person to an official at a public authority is seen as an official document if it refers to a case or 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.

Are you sure about the bolded phrasing?



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

* the security of the nation or its relations with another state or international organisation;
* the central fiscal, monetary or currency policy of the nation;
* the inspection, control or supervisory activities of a public authority;
* the interest of preventing or prosecuting crime;
* the protection of personal or economic circumstances of private subjects;
* the preservation of animal, plant or any other species.

Alright. Lots of loopholery here.



Any restriction of the right of access to official documents shall be scrupulously specified in 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.

"Special Act of Law"?



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

Ok, but who are the "other public authorities"?



§ 5 An official document to which the public has access shall be made available on request forthwith, or as soon as possible, free of charge (fees may be enacted to cover costs of material, but not at a profit and they must be set with regard to equal access for all), to any person wishing to examine it, in such form that it can be read, listened to, or otherwise comprehended. It may also be copied, reproduced, or used for transmission.

If it 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.

Alright.



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

No public authority is allowed 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 if there is any obstacle to release of the document.

Nope.



A note concerning obstacles to the release of a document may be made only one covered by a provision under §3. It shall refer to the relevant provision.

§ 7 Should anyone other than a general assembly, i.e. parliament, reject a request to examine an official document, or release such a document with a restriction of the applicant’s right to disclose its contents or otherwise dispose over it, the applicant may appeal the decision in a court of law. The appeal shall be examined promptly, and it shall be incumbent upon the party wishing to deny access to the document 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.

This sounds like a reworking of an earlier part, to make it more wordy.
Engineering chaos
27-03-2005, 11:19
NO thank you.
§ 3 The right of access to official documents may be restricted only if restriction is necessary with regard to

* the security of the nation or its relations with another state or international organisation;
* the central fiscal, monetary or currency policy of the nation;
* the inspection, control or supervisory activities of a public authority;
* the interest of preventing or prosecuting crime;
* the protection of personal or economic circumstances of private subjects;
* the preservation of animal, plant or any other species.

restriction in all cases is necassary all the time. wouldn't want people knowing how I managed to afford my new yacht, now would I ;)