NationStates Jolt Archive


Revised: F.O.I.A

Jeonju
16-05-2006, 16:12
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (F.O.I.A)

RECOGNIZING the need to foster democracy by ensuring public access to government agency records and information in all member nations;

OBSERVING that the F.O.I.A is a valuable means through which any person can learn how their Government operates;

UNDERSTANDING that the F.O.I.A may lead to the disclosure of waste, fraud, abuse, and wrongdoing in the member governments;

AWARE that the F.O.I.A may lead to the identification of unsafe consumer products, harmful drugs, and serious health hazards.

Section 1

(1)Agency, as a term used in this resolution, includes any Government department, military department, Government corporation, Government controlled corporation, or any independent regulatory agency.

(2)Record, and any other term used in this resolution in reference to information includes any information maintained by an agency in any format.

Section 2

Each Government agency will make publicly available upon request, the following forms, records and shall uphold policies including;

(1)A description and index of major information and record locator systems maintained by the agency; and

(2)Final opinions, including concurring and dissenting opinions, maintained or otherwise held by the agency

(3)(a)Records will be provided by each agency for a fee to be determined by each member nation and;

(b)Fees will not exceed the cost incurred by the agency pursuant to the search and duplication of such records.

(4)(a)Agency will determine within twenty days after receiving any such request whether to comply with or deny such request and will promptly notify the person making such request of this determination and;

(b)Upon determination by an agency to deny a request, state reasons for such denial of records.

(c)Upon determination by an agency to comply with a request for records, the records will be made promptly available to such person making such request.

(d)Refusal by a person to reasonably modify or reduce the scope of a request, after being given the opportunity to do so, will be considered grounds for denial of such request.

(5)All portions of a record will be provided to any person requesting such record after deletion of the portions which are exempt under Section 3. The amount of information deleted will be indicated on the released portion of the record, unless including that indication would harm an interest protected by the exemptions in Section 3.

Section 3

The F.O.I.A will provide access to all Government agency records (or portions of records) except those protected from release by six specific exemptions.

(1)(a)Documents and records specifically authorized under criteria established by government order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and;

(b)Are in fact properly classified pursuant to such government order.

(2)Records or other information that, if released to the public, would compromise the integrity of an ongoing criminal investigation.

(3)Documents related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency.

(4)Trade secrets and commercial or financial information, which are privileged or confidential;

(5)Personnel and medical files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;

(6)Records contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions.

Co-Authored by Jey
Gruenberg
16-05-2006, 16:17
Why is this an international concern. Nothing in your preamble indicates it to be so.
Jeonju
16-05-2006, 16:21
not even the part about waste and fraud?
Gruenberg
16-05-2006, 16:50
not even the part about waste and fraud?
Ok. Cut all the bits, except those that affect transnational corporations, then.

Should help with the wordcount too.
Ausserland
16-05-2006, 16:59
This is a significant improvement over the first draft. Several of the problems identified in that draft have been addressed. We haven't had (taken?) the time yet to study this draft in detail, but we'd like to provide a couple of comments.

We believe the definition of "record" is entirely too broad. We'll cite examples from the mythical land of RL. As written, the proposal would require the US Library of Congress to provide copies of books to requesters, in many cases clearly violating copyright. Government museums could not charge any more for books and sold in gift shops beyond actual costs of printing and. for commercially-published material, would again be required to violate copyright law. Perhaps the author should examine laws from the nations of RL legends (e.g., the US Federal Records Act) to get ideas for a workable definition.

The draft is in desperate need of reorganization. Terms should be defined before they are used. Basic requirements should be set before discussing implementation and exemptions.

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large
Jeonju
16-05-2006, 17:02
Ok. Cut all the bits, except those that affect transnational corporations, then.
define "bits". do you mean in the preamble? and i dont think i mention transnational corp.
Forgottenlands
16-05-2006, 17:02
It is generally asked that you keep all the drafts of the same proposal to a single thread. It is recommended that you edit the first post of the thread to keep it up-to-date with the most recent draft.
Jeonju
16-05-2006, 17:09
It is generally asked that you keep all the drafts of the same proposal to a single thread. It is recommended that you edit the first post of the thread to keep it up-to-date with the most recent draft.

so noted...i wasnt sure, given that the first draft had already been proposed, but this makes sense, i was only aware of the "edit" option very recently. is there also a way to delete the old thread?
Forgottenlands
16-05-2006, 17:17
More often, mods will merge two threads when they come around.

You might be able to ask the old thread to be closed. Regardless, I'd keep it there because then people can reference points they feel that are still important to the debate.
Jeonju
16-05-2006, 17:33
The draft is in desperate need of reorganization. Terms should be defined before they are used. Basic requirements should be set before discussing implementation and exemptions.
did some rearranging...does it make more sense or less
Cluichstan
16-05-2006, 18:02
Not an international concern.
Jeonju
16-05-2006, 18:06
Not an international concern.
except when it is.
Cluichstan
16-05-2006, 18:14
except when it is.

And when, praytell, might that be?
Jeonju
16-05-2006, 18:21
And when, praytell, might that be?
let's see, when a nation's gov't intends to wage an international war...
or, when it plots to assassinate a foreign leader
or, when it does anything that involves a foreign nation
Gruenberg
16-05-2006, 18:37
let's see, when a nation's gov't intends to wage an international war...
or, when it plots to assassinate a foreign leader
or, when it does anything that involves a foreign nation
How does this stop any of that?

Documents and records specifically authorized under criteria established by government order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy
Cluichstan
16-05-2006, 18:37
let's see, when a nation's gov't intends to wage an international war...

Oh, so we're supposed to turn over information to our enemies? Fuck that.

or, when it plots to assassinate a foreign leader

Assassinations are usually illegal anyway. Besides, fuck that.

or, when it does anything that involves a foreign nation

Fuck that.

EDIT: And what Gruen said.
Jeonju
16-05-2006, 18:55
How does this stop any of that?
the act wouldn't stop it, merely provide the opportunity for
a. the gov't to slip up and not classify the proof.
b. the citizens living under corrupt governments to provide proof of their government's activities.
Jeonju
16-05-2006, 19:06
Oh, so we're supposed to turn over information to our enemies? Fuck that.
If your enemy is your own citizens, then, yeah.
Cluichstan
16-05-2006, 19:06
If your enemy is your own citizens, then, yeah.

Ever hear of spies, dumbass?
Jeonju
16-05-2006, 19:29
Ever hear of spies, dumbass?
have you read the proposal? if you want to classify everything then you can. of course there is no quicker way to a citizen uprising than to keep everything secret from them. and dont forget to keep them afraid of imaginary spies and terrorists too.
Cluichstan
16-05-2006, 19:45
have you read the proposal? if you want to classify everything then you can. of course there is no quicker way to a citizen uprising than to keep everything secret from them. and dont forget to keep them afraid of imaginary spies and terrorists too.

Then what the fuck is the point?
Ausserland
16-05-2006, 22:42
Originally Posted by Cluichstan
Oh, so we're supposed to turn over information to our enemies? Fuck that.

If your enemy is your own citizens, then, yeah.

The proposal talks about making records public. When information is made public, it's available to all -- friends and enemies alike. Once you release information to the public, you lose all ability to control it. That's a basic principle of information security. And, as we pointed out before, the proposal says nothing about who may request release of records. The request could come from Granny Knobloch down the street or an intelligence officer of a hostile nation or a predatory mega-corporation in a far-off land. The proposal requires release unless exempted.

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large
Caratia
17-05-2006, 00:02
This is neither the UN's concern nor is it in any way beneficial. I applaud the intentions of the proposal, but, considering the way our UN operates and the varying peoples and nations coming under its jurisdiction, this is best left a national issue.

(Basically what Cluich and Gruen said.)

A. T. Stilgram
Caratian Ambassador to the United Nations
Jeonju
17-05-2006, 04:48
Then what the fuck is the point?
for you, there is no point, obvoiusly. For us, the point is to bring nations like yours under compliance of this resolution so the citizens in your nation can better understand how their government operates.
The Most Glorious Hack
17-05-2006, 09:25
Dial it back, Cluich.
Cluichstan
17-05-2006, 14:44
OOC: Dialed back, Your Hackness.

As for this proposal...
http://test256.free.fr/UN%20Cards/tripe.jpg
Kivisto
17-05-2006, 16:52
have you read the proposal? if you want to classify everything then you can. of course there is no quicker way to a citizen uprising than to keep everything secret from them. and dont forget to keep them afraid of imaginary spies and terrorists too.


If we can classify everything we want, then the resolution is useless. Those of us who wish to keep our people in the dark will do so, and those of us who wish to enlighten our people will do so. Nothing has changed. Spies are not imaginary. Neither are terrorists. I may not believe in ninjas, but that doesn't mean they wont kill me in my sleep, it just means I won't be prepared for them when they come.
Cluichstan
17-05-2006, 16:58
http://elowel.org/images/ninja.gif
Coming for Kivisto!
Kivisto
17-05-2006, 18:09
http://elowel.org/images/ninja.gif
Coming for Kivisto!


I'd be terrified, but I don't believe in ninjas. It's on the principle that if they know I believe in them, they might feel I am a threat to their secrecy and have me eliminated. If, on the other hand, they know that I don't believe in them, then they know they have nothing to fear from me, and will leave me alone.

That's how I manage to sleep at night. Curled up hiding my head under my pillows, praying that I don't talk about ninjas in my sleep.
Zeldon 6229 Nodlez
18-05-2006, 05:49
let's see, when a nation's gov't intends to wage an international war...
or, when it plots to assassinate a foreign leader
or, when it does anything that involves a foreign nation

"TOP SECRET" Under Title 7 of the Zeldon Defense Act
WAR ORDER 199 "Sniper ordered to assasinate Burger King, two days prior to the invasion of Beeftown, Burgerland." "TOP SECRET"

Do you mean a document like this has to be included for public view. As it does all the above in it but believe if we stamp it TS under a legal law then it exempt.

Section 3

The F.O.I.A will provide access to all Government agency records (or portions of records) except those protected from release by six specific exemptions.

(1)(a)Documents and records specifically authorized under criteria established by government order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and; As it clearly is exempty under S3-1a

Then if criminal charges are brought in the matter it exempt by way of the section on documents in an ongoing criminal investigation due to the assasination.

S3-2 (2)Records or other information that, if released to the public, would compromise the integrity of an ongoing criminal investigation.


OH and please burn this once you have read it..

Also we took out the dates of action and name of the sniper assigned and point where he would perform his duty. I hope that meets the proposal since it said we could if we state we did take things out.