Tag: Freedom of Information

Freedom of Information in the Philippines

Freedom of Information in the Philippines

 

 

With the recent  Napoles  Pork Barrel PDAF funding scandal in the Philippines, the nation should swiftly adopt Freedom of Information (FOI) to make government and official processes, funding etc., more transparent and accessible to the people.

In the Philippines news recently, Senator Grace  Poe-Llamanzares presented an initial fact-finding result about enacting and establishing Freedom of Information (FOI).

The  consensus of the government she found was that FOI will be detrimental to the national security of the nation. This seems specious as FOI has been successfully applied in many countries such as the US, UK and most of Europe and some Asian nations such as Malaysia.

Not taking up FOI is more of a personal choice rather than a public one.

As below national security is encompassed and protected in FOI legislation.

Most citizens, particularly tax payers would like to know how their government, departments and  public bodies are spending budgets allotted to them, particularly for public works,  or what they actually do and achieve.

Generally such statistics are not relevant or applicable to national security!?

Hmm.. or does Sen. Poe-Llamanzares and others with a vested interest, think that ‘National Security’ would be compromised by civil unrest/riots if people found out how they are being conned by corrupt officials and despite the Philippines becoming richer, the general populace never see any benefit where it is needed most? 

We hope President  Aquino will strongly consider introducing FOI after his speech about the PDAF scandal where he stated more transparency is needed!

Below if you like to know  is a basic guide to FOI as applied in UK etc.

 

FOI works in two ways:

  • public authorities are obliged to publish certain information about their activities; and
  • members of the public are entitled to request information from public authorities.

Public authorities spend money collected from taxpayers etc., and make decisions that can significantly affect many people’s lives.  Access to information helps the public make public authorities accountable for their actions and allows public debate to be better informed and more productive.

Recorded information includes printed documents, computer files, letters, emails, photographs, and sound or video recordings.

In the UK we have the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) which is similar to other countries having FOI.

  • everybody has a right to access official information. Disclosure of information should be the default – in other words, information should be kept private only when there is a good reason and it is permitted by the Act;
  • an applicant (requester) does not need to give  a reason for wanting the information. On the contrary, you must justify refusing them information;
  • All requests for information are treated equally, except under some circumstances relating to vexatious requests and personal data .
  • The information someone can get under the Act should not be affected by who they are.  All  requesters should be treated equally, whether they are journalists, local residents, public authority employees, or foreign researchers; and
  • because you should treat all requesters equally, you should only disclose information under the Act if you would disclose it to anyone else who asked. In other words, you should consider any information you release under the Act as if it were being released to the world at large.

Sensitive information such as for national security, legal, crime investigation etc, personal data can be exempt if there is good reason, however Governments etc., should not hide behind such if not applicable.    

Some sensitive documents are released but are redacted (some content blacked out-covered) if deemed necessary.

An FOI request can be refused under the following circumstances:

  • It would cost too much or take too much staff time to deal with the request.( if a straight forward  request such as providing statistics or costs, normally there is no fee. However the request is for detailed information that would require research and collation a fee is required).
  • The request is vexatious.
  • The request repeats a previous request from the same person.

In addition, the Freedom of Information Act contains a number of exemptions that allow you to withhold information from a requester. In some cases, it will allow you to refuse to confirm or deny whether you hold information.

Some exemptions relate to a particular type of information, for instance, information relating to government policy. Other exemptions are based on the harm that would arise or would likely arise from disclosure, for example, if disclosure would be likely to prejudice a criminal investigation, national security or prejudice someone’s commercial interests.

There is also an exemption for personal data if releasing it would be contrary to the Data Protection Act.

Most government official agencies have individuals or sections dealing with FOI requests from the public.

In the UK we can make a request(must always be written)  through letter or email.

Normally there is a set time for the government to reply to a request. in the UK it is 20 working days.

The UK has an Information Commissioner who can intercede with the government etc. if the FOI Act is not being followed correctly.

 

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Who will guard the guards themselves?

“Who watches the watchmen?”

“Who will watch the watch-guards?”

It seems nobody is willing to do so or unable to do so!!!

The pork barrel scandal will just die a natural death or swept under the carpet! This is more or less official as per latest report from the Philippine Daily Inquirer.

This development really upset me. In my mind’s eyes I feel that no one can be trusted in the Government. Everyone is tainted with the whiff of corruption by not doing anything to pursue and progress the investigation into the P10billion pork barrel scandal.

Hello! 10 Billion pesos is 150 Million British pound sterling or 231 Million Dollars!

Can any of the governing people grasp the concept of this amount in terms of new housing for estero dwellers, feeding the starving poor, providing medical care for the sick, schooling the illiterates, cleaning the Pasig River, dental care, improving etc, etc, etc.

Perhaps these people elected are no longer in touch with reality. They are more concerned with what to wear during a senate summit.

Forget bullying China, our enemies are within!!!

Most Filipinos allegedly believe is that the Government is a chamber of horror, where corruption starts at the top. Investigation into the pork barrel will be like Pandora’s Box. All manners of evil doing will be let loose!

To my kapwa Filipinos, you should not let corruption to continue. You all deserve a better government, a government for the people, not a self-serving one.

Many are corrupt and those who are not are too weak and bury their heads in the sand. It is time for us to let them know that enough is more than enough!!!

We want transparency and the enactment of the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT IS LONG OVERDUE! CALLING GRACE POE, SHOW US YOUR METTLE!!!

JXXX
……………………………….

Senate won’t probe P10-B pork scam

By 

1:05 am | Saturday, July 27th, 2013

The Senate will not use the hearings on the P2.26-trillion national budget for next year to dig into the alleged P10-billion pork barrel scam, but Sen. Francis Escudero expects the issue to come up when senators scrutinize allocations for governmental agencies.

“[The] priority is the budget and performance and we intend to pass the budget on time.  But I’m sure the question will come up,” Escudero told the Inquirer when asked if he would take advantage of the budget hearings to look into the alleged channeling of P10 billion in pork to phantom projects through bogus nongovernment organizations (NGOs) over the past 10 years.

Escudero, the chair of the Senate committee on finance that will examine the administration’s national expenditure program for 2014, earlier filed a resolution calling for an inquiry into the scam.

Senate President Franklin Drilon and some other senators, however, disagreed with a Senate probe into the scam because of the involvement in the scandal of at least six senators from both the majority and the minority.

Escudero said he would not ask his colleagues to adopt his resolution for an inquiry into the scam.

“It’s up to them.  They are big enough to decide for themselves what is best.  Not for me to convince them one way or the other. Ultimately, it’s the people who will decide who did or did not do his or her job,” he said.

Escudero said he would leave it to the majority to decide what to do with the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), or pork barrel, after the exposure of the corruption that attended its use over the past decade.

Drilon earlier said that the pork barrel could be effectively abolished if Congress did not allocate funds for the PDAF in the national budget.

“I am open to whatever the majority will, in its wisdom, decide.  Personally, I think we can provide stricter rules and mandatory disclosure to prevent abuse,” Escudero said.

In an interview over radio station dwIZ on Friday, Escudero said he wanted the budget to prescribe the use of the PDAF mainly for the poorest areas of the country.

“We will be stricter and I want to remove the alignment of funds to NGOs… that can’t be monitored,” Escudero said.

Escudero said he would also push for stricter transparency measures such as the publication of how the senators and the representatives used their pork.

“Just be transparent and, as they say, hide nothing.  Stand by where you allocated your funds and you should be proud that you were able to help your fellowman.  One shouldn’t hide and that document shouldn’t be kept a secret,” Escudero said.

Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/453529/senate-wont-probe-p10-b-pork-scam#ixzz2aEQ8EtIi
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

Grace Poe-Llamanzares & The Freedom of Information

Wow!

Grace Poe was given the very complex Freedom of Information case, which has the potentiality to unravel the live currents of corruption that flow freely in every nook and cranny in all levels of the Philippine Government.

If I am one of those sceptics, I would readily question this gargantuan assignment being given to a neophyte.

If I am a sceptic, I would say the tasking of FOI to a neophyte is inspired – from the point of views of course of the vultures and hyenas that patrols the gloomed corridor of power.

If I am a sceptic, I would say that the promulgation of FOI is non-starter. Too many entrenched suckers and predators have their tentacles firmly glued on to the arse of those in power.

If I am a sceptic, I would say FOI will not see the light of day because it never meant to be actioned, applied in the first place.

I hope those sceptics are wrong and we will see a real change.

Let us support Grace in this mammoth task. It is too important for FOI not to be ratified as a law.  I thought the Government has finally seen the light of day.  I was very optimistic that transparency will be the course of action as per PNoy’s SONA 2013.

Good luck Grace, you will surely need it.

BTW Who is Grace Poe? Surely this is another blog!

JXXX

 Grace Poe-Llamanzares & The Freedom of Information

Grace Poe: Palace not passionate about FOI bill but not out to kill it

By 

 Thursday, July 25th, 2013

Senator Mary Grace Poe-Llamanzares. FILE PHOTO

 

MANILA, Philippines – Malacañang is not “passionate” but is not also out to “kill” the controversial Freedom of Information bill, neophyte Senator Grace Poe, who now heads the Senate committee on public information, said Thursday.

Poe assured that Malacañang has not given any order to the committee not to pass the bill.

“Obviously, it’s not their passion but wala rin naman silang ginagawa para patayin ito (but they are not also doing anything to kill it),” she said during a weekly forum at the Senate.

Despite Malacañang’s stand on the issue, Poe vowed to prioritize the bill that she even filed a resolution urging the appropriate body, which is her own committee, to immediately start full deliberations of the measure.

Asked if she would ask President Benigno Aquino III to certify the bill as urgent, the senator said, “I could eventually do that but I will admit to you now that I will not do that until I actually heard all sides. That includes the side of the President.”

It was up to Malacañang, Poe said, to decide if the bill should be prioritized by Congress.

“What I think is that it is a safety for us especially that in 2016 we will have a new administration. It’s better that we are able to have a guarantee that we have access to information,” she said.

“Another thing is that our archiving system in the country is really bad. If we have a bill like that, it should include provisions on funding for archiving for every gov’t institution or how they are able to discard certain documents,” she added.

Poe openly expressed her position against the right of reply provision in the bill, saying it’s a form of censorship.

Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/452657/grace-poe-palace-not-passionate-about-foi-bill-but-not-out-to-kill-it#ixzz2a39M7WvO
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook