Freedom of Information: A Comparative Legal Survey - Federation of ...

a work-plan and annual expenditure estimate;
a manual or order relating to work which affects the rights or duties of private individuals;
published materials relating to the powers and duties of the public body;
monopolistic contracts and joint ventures;
resolutions of governing bodies established by law; and
other information as determined by the Offi cial Information Commission.
The Offi cial Information Commission may set rules and procedures regarding access via inspection
pursuant to section 9. As with requests for information, access to these documents may be subject to
payment of a fee which has been approved by the Commission.
Exceptions
The Thai RTI Law includes a full regime of exceptions. Section 3 of the Law provides that all laws which
are inconsistent with it shall, to the extent of that inconsistency, be replaced by it. However, section 15(1)(6)
provides that information which other laws render confi dential is exempt. It must, therefore, be assumed
that section 3 does not apply to exceptions and that, as a result, secrecy laws are effectively preserved
by the RTI Law. Furthermore, public bodies are required to put in place systems and rules to prevent
unauthorised disclosure of information, in accordance with the Rule on Offi cial Secrets Protection (section
16).
Most of the exceptions do include a form of harm test, although these range from a possibility of harm (will
jeopardise) to a certainty of harm (will result in). Two key exceptions which are not harm-based are internal
opinions or advice, although this does at least exclude technical and factual reports, and information
provided in confi dence. Together, these are very signifi cant exceptions. The Law does not provide for
certifi cates, although it does allow information to be rendered secret by Royal Decree (see below).
Section 15, the main exception provision, provides that when issuing an order prohibiting the disclosure
of offi cial information, a public body shall take into account its duties, the public interest and any private
interests involved. The reference here to the public interest, although useful, is not the same as a general
public interest override, which should be couched in mandatory terms and should not be just one factor to
be considered. A stronger form of public interest override is contained in section 20, which provides that
offi cials shall not be liable for good faith disclosures where they release information for the purpose of
securing an overriding public interest, and the disclosure is reasonable. This differs from public interest
overrides in most right to information laws, which provide for a form of balancing between the harm to the
protected interest and the overall public interest. The Thai Law, in contrast, is almost a combination of a
public interest override and protection for good faith disclosures.
The Law does not include a clear statement on severability but this is probably the intention of section 9(2),
which also applies to requests, and which provides that where part of the information subject to public
inspection (or disclosure pursuant to a request) is covered by an exception, that part shall be deleted
or otherwise dealt with so as to prevent disclosure of that part. This suggests that the remainder of the
information, the non-exempt part, should still be disclosed.
The Law also provides for time limits on the non-disclosure of information. Information relating to the
Royal Institution shall be disclosed after 75 years while all other information is presumed to be subject
to disclosure after 20 years, although the public body may, where it is of the opinion that the information
should still not be disclosed after 20 years, extend this by up to fi ve years. The information shall then be
transferred to the National Archives Division or an appropriate other archiving body or, where provided for
in the rules, destroyed (section 26).
109