Freedom of Information Bill

Freedom of Information Bill

Talking about natures of man: one can be very secretive, and the other can be very annoying when seeking answers – a man’s qualities that are understandable. I could still remember one of my long-time friends – K – who keeps on bugging me for days just asking this sole question: Who is that person you are always texting? I have the rights to ask you questions and you are obliged to give me answers because WE ARE FRIENDS, stressing those last words though. Well, she obviously play the role of the ‘annoying’ person and I am the secretive one. After months of her asking the same question over and over again, I still feel like I am not going to tell her anything about that person. But then, she continues the same old routine, and I am like: Goodness, gracious, King of Men, save me!

Her last words, “I have the rights to ask you questions and you are obliged to give me answers” echoes in my mind. Does she really has the rights just because we are friends? It is the same issue that the Philippine government has today. It is an issue concerning the signing of Freedom of Information Bill.

Recently, different news corporation have stormed newspapers and online news pages over the signing of the Freedom of Information Bill.

What is really about this bill? And why some people and different institutions are not in favor for this said bill to be signed or passed?

As per Rappler’s report. Last July 24, President Rodrigo “Digong” Duterte has already signed an Executive Order requiring all offices under the executive branch to go full public disclosure. The directive covers “all government offices under the executive branch including, but not limited to, the national government and all its offices, departments, bureaus, corporations, state universities and colleges.” In addition, the local government units are also mandated to follow this said Executive Order. This EO is one of the items written on the priority list of the President.

          The Freedom of Information Bill has always been there, the problem is people of different interest try to hinder the passing of this said law. 26 years in the making but still we have to fully understand this, this is what they always trying to say. In Pnoy’s administration the signing of this law has been controversial as well. In fact one of his known allied government officer is convicted and placed to jail because he resisted to submit himself to transparency questioning his wealth later claimed as ill-gotten. Other official of the government has already submitted themselves a version of FOI manifesting that they support this long-awaited piece of legislation.

I have asked different people, including my students promptly if they have any ideas about the Freedom of Information bill. Their responses are astonishing, they have a lot to share and it is overwhelming to know that they are well-aware of what is happening around them. Although, there are few who have said that Freedom of Information bill is the same as the Freedom of Expression or the right to freely express own views and opinions. And so I stand to correct the knowledge they prior have.

The Freedom of Information Bill is about our right to have access to different public or governmental records, and documents and all other official acts of government. To be certain, this proposed law clarifies that it is a general rule that all information must be available to the public. It is also said here that those public officers and employees who fail to abide the law should face the right sanction that the law imposes.

Of all the people, media practitioners are the prime benefactor of this law because of the nature of their work. They ought to expose what they deem not right or unjust in the government. This law will help the government as well to live up to the expectation of the people – a government that is transparent and accountable.

As a teacher working in one of the state universities in Philippines, Tarlac State University, this law is beneficial, personally. State universities are also mandated to go full transparent, this give me and my fellow teachers too to question things that what we see unfair happening inside the workplace. The following are just few of the things why we should care about the FOI.

1. Aside from putting into an enabling law our constitutional right, it also makes real the concept of “Accountability” of our government that operates under a “representative” or democratic system – a government that works for the people.

2. It promotes “transparency” in public office – a crucial component in the war against corruption.

3. As educators, our knowledge of how things work in government – from day to day transactions to the complete list of all Presidential appointees, to other vital documents enables us to impart to our students a more realistic, truthful, fact-based instruction on issues involving the state of our government.

            Personally, I am skeptical about this law since it could be abused by anyone and use it against the country or any officials of the government.  That is why exceptions for the disclosure of information are drafted in section 7 to 8 under the FOI bill.

Subject to the qualifications set forth in Section 7: Provided, that the information is specifically designated and described, and the facts and reasons for preserving the confidentiality are precisely and specifically recited, and: Provided, further, That such information shall be available to either House of Congress at all times, access to information may be denied when:

(a)   The revelation of the information will create a clear and present danger of war, invasion or any external threat to the State as determined by the Office of the President and/or the Secretary of the Department of National Defense: Provided, That the Supreme Court may, upon complaint by any citizen, inquire into the sufficiency of the factual basis for such determination;

(b)    The information pertains to the foreign affairs of the Republic of the Philippines, when its revelation would unduly weaken the negotiating position of the government in an ongoing bilateral or multilateral negotiation or seriously jeopardize the diplomatic relations of the Philippines with one or more states with which it intends to keep friendly relations, except that such information must always be accessible to either House of Congress;

(c)    The information pertains to internal and external defense and law enforcement, when the revelation thereof would render a legitimate military operation ineffective, unduly compromise the prevention, detection or suppression of a criminal activity, or endanger the life or physical safety of confidential or protected sources or witnesses, law enforcement and military personnel or their immediate families. Information relating to the details of the administration, budget and expenditure, and management of the defense and law enforcement agencies shall always be accessible to the public;

(d)   The information pertains to the personal information of a third party natural person, unless it forms part of a public record, or the third party is or was an official of a government agency and the information relates to his or her public function;

(e)   The information pertains to trade, industrial, financial or commercial secrets of a third party natural or juridical person, obtained in confidence by a government agency whenever the revelation thereof would seriously prejudice the interests of the third party in trade, industrial, financial or commercial competition, unless the third party has consented to the disclosure of the information;

(f)     The information is privileged from production in legal proceedings by law or by the Rules of Court, unless the person entitled to the privilege has waived it;

(g)   The information is exempted by statutes of Congress, in addition to those provided in this section;

(h)   The information is obtained by any committee of either House of Congress in executive session; and

(i)     Drafts of decisions of any executive, administrative, judicial or quasi-judicial body in the exercise of their adjudicatory functions are being requested.

Even if the information fall under the exceptions drafted in the succeeding section, access to information shall not be denied if:

a)      The information may be reasonably severed from the body of the information which would be subject to exceptions; or

b)      The public interest in the disclosure outweighs the harm to the interest sought to be protected by the exceptions.

With all these information from this bill, I can now clearly comprehend why people, especially those who are working in the government, are against this law. Some of the reasons maybe: One, since they are working for the government they are also subject to mandated transparency. They are obliged to present their papers publicly, including their assets and liabilities. They are afraid since here in the Philippines if you are a government official and you own large businesses or at least they can see you living in luxury, they would think that the wealth you are possessing are all ill-gotten. Two, in this country where crab-mentality is a trend, publicizing your papers is like laying your ace-cards, it is like a suicide. I can still remember the news about former Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona where he is accused of plunder since he is requested to present his papers in public and it is used against him. In this country where you can be a criminal in an instant, and almost everything can be used against you, I think this bill needs more hearings.

Below are some of the updated information about the Freedom of Information under the Duterte administration. As per Rappler’s report:

Filipinos may request for needed information through a letter of request sent to the concerned office along with a valid proof of identity. No person requesting for information shall be denied access unless the information sought "falls under any of the exception enshrined in the constitution existing law or jurisprudence," the EO stated.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) and Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) must provide a list of exceptions to be submitted to the Office of the President within 30 calendar days from the effectivity of the EO. The DOJ and the OSG will also serve as the oversight bodies that will decide on requests for information that may affect national security. If the request clearly does not fall under the exceptions identified, the office concerned should grant and release the request within 15 days, the EO stated. Heads of agencies and officers who fail to abide by the EO will face administrative cases, Andanar said.

While the signed EO is a landmark action in the long fight for FOI, advocates still push for its legislation in Congress since the measure only covers offices under the executive branch.

"We hope that this new administration will continue to pursue the enactment of a complete Freedom of Information Law through legislation, with provisions requiring access to particular documents and data in all levels of government, penalties for public officials and employees who deny such access, and other components that will truly guarantee transparency, accountability, and people's participation," FOI Youth Initiative said in a statement.”

A progressive youth group, meanwhile, grieved the limitations of the President's order.

We note, however, that the new EO also has many limitations. For example, it clearly states that it will not cover 'exceptions enshrined in the Constitution, existing law or jurisprudence.' As such, limitations such as the invocation of 'executive privilege' and national security are still there – exceptions that we duly fought against in the crafting of an FOI bill in Congress," Kabataan Party-List said.

The FOI saw a push in the 16th Congress when the measure was passed by the Senate on third and final reading on March 10, 2014. But the House of Representatives failed to pass its version for concurrence despite former president Benigno Aquino III naming it as one of his legislative priorities for 2015.

I know it still too early to judge the administration whether or not the move to sign this bill would bring any good to this country, what we can do now is to go with the flow and maybe someday if not tomorrow we can already see the implications of their actions.