EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

With the growing clamor on transparency and good governance coupled with the recent public pressure requiring a law to be passed not only to suppress but to totally eradicate corruption through the abolition of PDAF, the Freedom of Information Bill equally has posed the same level of attention from the public. It is the perfect anti-thesis to counter all the present controversies our government is facing to date. The Philippines is perceived as one of the most corrupt countries in the world, getting a score of 34 on a scale of 1 to 100 with 100 being very clean, according to the latest Corruption Perceptions Index of Transparency International.1 This should not come as a surprise and neither should we overstate the problem. It is pretty minor in the grand scheme of things. Corruption is like a disease endemic in almost all countries around the globe. But just like any other diseases, there is a cure, the Freedom of Information law has been considered as the universal penicillin, the anti-viral shot that can cure the system by providing transparency and accountability from the government. In fine, the Freedom of Information brings many benefits, but it also entails risks. But studies still show, from all over the globe, that its benefits outweigh any negative outcome. TABLE OF SUMMARY OF PROS, CONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Pros 1. Cons Recommendations 1. The major concern of 1. In the context of officials on the FOI transparency, there Bill is the lack of should be a clear feasible exceptions, sunshine clause in because if the law some of the exceptions in itself is overbroad, the FOI law to declassify this will open the information found to floodgates of abuse have historical value after thus hampering the 15 years. (Fifteen years is efficiency of public suggested as this is the

http://globalnation.inquirer.net/58823/philippines-remains-one-of-most-corrupt-countriessurvey

PROs and CONs FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL Prepared by: Atty.Norman A. Pelinio

service... Contrary to this, the public stakeholders have raised a major concern on the existence of these exceptions, deeming it as a source of abuse of power.

prescriptive period for the filing of cases against graft and corruption under Republic Act No. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.) -Time Limit for Internal Review (to determine public interest test).

2. Studies show that it 2. Studies show that it is 2. Add a penalty clause to lessens corruption, an abused by journalists, those individuals whose undeniable problem businesses seeking a request are plainly of our country. The commercial arbitrary, capricious and officials, in countries advantage and no basis in law and in which have long individuals seeking fact. implemented this purely private similar law have advantage. showed more openness and transparency. 3. Efficient use of public 3. This law will entail 3. The existence of an resources, services more public Information and finances since expenditure. The Committee/Agency will officials will tend to workload of help in making it easier spend reasonably and government officials for the departments to do with utmost intensifies as this will the work in relation to the accountability. mean additional work FOI Law. for the government official concerned. In other countries, there Moreover, the is a separate agency that government has to primarily handles the put in the necessary implementation of this capital expenditures law and they would have and operational an Information expenses to Commissioner. implement this.
PROs and CONs FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL Prepared by: Atty.Norman A. Pelinio

4. Every act government that tend deleterious public can available media.

of the 4. Media can tend to 4. The law should provide agencies feast on the smallest provisions on limiting the to be issue and nonacts of media on this to the important matters that matter; provide specific be easily goes out to the public. penalties to media to the practitioners who will There may be times abuse the law. when the media posts One of the principal it to the public may benefits of openness lack some facts or and transparency is matters to clarify the that it encourages story. public authorities to act in manner that would not embarrass them should it enter the public domain. 5. Encourage or better 5. One of the 5. Offense of destroying or yet, assure record unexpected altering information keeping. (Although ramifications is the should be strictly studies show that chilling effect: implemented. officials learn how to attempts to lessen the information undermine the act provided). through less keeping of records from meetings and discussions occurring more often away from official recorded procedures. Government from other countries suggests that this does happen (often at the level of local government) but it is not a large problem. However, worthy to admit that it is
PROs and CONs FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL Prepared by: Atty.Norman A. Pelinio

actually quite hard to measure such activity. Their value would be diminishedthey could even be misleadingif they had to be edited or bowdlerised to minimise risks of unacceptable disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Not only are the minutes a valuable tool of administration, they also serve, on eventual disclosure, as important historical records. 6. Encourages Public to 6. Possible frivolous or 6. Disclosure Log; Penalty be more inquisitive trivial requests for this in the law as well. hence increases public merely to disrupt However, this may be participation in policy governmental work quite hard to prove. and decision making. Also, we could provide an exemption to deny requests when they are frivolous or vexatious. As to what is frivolous or vexatious is a matter to be answered and provided with in a proper Request Procedure or Code. 7. Unnecessary secrecy 7. It may affect the wise 7. As already provided in in Government and and impartial decision the Bill, the exemptions our public services making capabilities of should stand, No less
PROs and CONs FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL Prepared by: Atty.Norman A. Pelinio

has long been held to our government than the Supreme Court undermine good especially in provided the exceptions governance and important treaties and in the case of Senate vs. public administration. agreements. Ermita (G.R. No. Thus, openness in the 169777) government will encourage public trust. 8. Publication Schemes 8. The cost of 8. In the long run, we can (pro-active implementing the act charge fees for disclosure) is a great can be deemed its information requests. potential for public Achilles heel due to This fee will not stop bodies to save time the increase in it its requests but rather it will and money e.g work load posed, the serve as a check and at Publication in Official possible unnecessary the same time regulating Gazette Websites. request, etc. mechanism to filter the amount of requests Publication scheme As more people coming from the could cut down on the become more and individuals. medias fishing more aware of the expedition legislation, the Note: We could have fees number of requests only on certain sectors for information will (like media, etc.) increase and these requests for information could become more and more complex. With this fact on hand, the costs of answering to the requests for information will tend to increase as well highly demonstrated by the amount of time required to answer these requests. Also, the research can be by passed by
PROs and CONs FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL Prepared by: Atty.Norman A. Pelinio

9.

10.The limited number of days to reply to a request will encourage the authorities to be serious and not take the law for granted and ensure that in every act they do they keep a record of the matter to enable the public know of such act. 11. 11.Hard to determine 11.An information which agency to committee can solve this contact per se given issue by directing that some transactions requestors to the right are intertwined in agency.
PROs and CONs FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL Prepared by: Atty.Norman A. Pelinio

Internet Search engines, Fairly Antiquated approach. The information can be hard to locate on public authorities websites. 9. Note, the suggested 9. The focus on the request bill provides that the should be only on requestor provide whether or not the his/her information. information should or should not be revealed. The fact of requiring The requesters identity one to reveal his or should be irrelevant. her identity with the request could affect not only how the government would react to the request but also, contrarily, the requester could use a different name. 10.The authorities could 10. cause a delay in their responses. IN addition the authorities are now afraid to deal with FOI requests because of the penalty clause embodied in the bill.

various transactions. 12. 12.Publishing more 12.With the advent of information on our Information technology, websites takes extra it is already high time resource internally that publication be done within service areas via the internet. to decide what information they are To meet the unnerving going to publicise and demands and private also why that sector, each government information might be instrumentality / agency useful. should publish and update new information at least once in two weeks in consonance with the reply period as embodied in the bill itself. 13.Greater release of 13.We should have the data is invariably agenda of going forward going to lead to to publicise more open greater criticism of dataraw dataso that public bodies and every act of the individuals, which government can be may sometimes be interrogated. unfair or partial. In our view, while regrettable, this is a price worth paying for the needs of the few outweighs the needs of the many.

13.Public Confidence and enhance the quality of decision making of the government. Studies noted that the very existence of the legislation gives [the public] some confidence that public authorities have little to hide behind. They know they can be scrutinized and this of itself tends towards a different relationship between public authorities and the public.

PROs and CONs FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL Prepared by: Atty.Norman A. Pelinio

14.

14.

15.

14.We recommend that all public bodies subject to the Act should be required to publish data on the timeliness of their response to freedom of information requests. This should include data on extensions and time taken for internal reviews. This will not only inform the wider public of the authoritys compliance with its duties under the Act but will allow the Information Commissioner to monitor those organisations with the lowest rate of compliance. 15.With the changing 15. times, information and the modes of putting it out to the public change all the time. The Freedom of Information must be versatile enough to catch up with the changing times. For if it is unable to do so, the tendency would be that information could be diverted in various modes and ways to keep lesser records of information.

PROs and CONs FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL Prepared by: Atty.Norman A. Pelinio