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

epeated here. In most cases, the documents subject to proactive publication are still subject to the regime
of exceptions.
In the United Kingdom, in contrast, the law requires public bodies to come up with publication schemes,
which then need to be approved by the independent Information Commissioner. Alternatively, public bodies
can simply adopt the appropriate model publication scheme provided by the Commissioner. The approval
of the Commissioner may be time limited, or may be withdrawn, allowing for progressive increases in
proactive disclosure over time. This is a fl exible approach, and allows for change over time. At the same
time, it requires active oversight by an independent body, in this case the Information Commissioner,
and it may also lead to differences in the scope of information published by different public bodies. Some
countries, like Mexico, essentially adopt the fi rst approach, but provide for oversight of the system by an
independent body.
Many laws – including those of Uganda, Kyrgyzstan, Peru and India – provide for regular updating of the
information published, often annually. In Peru, certain fi nancial information needs to be published on a
quarterly basis, within 30 days of the end of the quarter, along with information from the previous two
quarters for comparative purposes.
A number of laws address the issue of making information subject to proactive publication widely
accessible. The Thai law provides for a dual approach whereby certain information must be published
in the Government Gazette while other information must be made available for inspection. The idea of a
sort of triage for the duty to publish is interesting, although publication in the Government Gazette may
not be the best way to reach a broad audience. The United States follows the same approach but, at the
same time, requires that this information be made available electronically. The Mexican law goes even
further, requiring public bodies to make a computer available to the public for the purpose of accessing
information, along with a printer and technical support where needed. The Kyrgyz and Azeri laws provide
for dissemination via public libraries and the Internet, among others, while the Indian and Peruvian laws
contain specifi c instructions to public bodies to use appropriate methods of dissemination, including in
rural or low-population density areas.
Under the United States law, any information which has been released pursuant to a request and which
is likely to be the subject of another request must be made available electronically, along with an index
of such records. This provides a built-in mechanism for ensuring that important information regularly
becomes available. In Mexico, all information provided in response to a request is available electronically.
The Bulgarian law is innovative, requiring public bodies to publish information where this may prevent
a threat to life, health, security or property, or where this is in the overall public interest, a potentially
extensive obligation. The Azeri law similarly requires information posing a threat to life, health, property,
the environment or other matters of signifi cant public interest to be disseminated immediately on a
proactive basis.
Alone among the countries surveyed, the Kyrgyz right to information law makes provision for open meetings,
although some countries, notably the United States, have specifi c laws addressing this. Open meetings are
an important mechanism for promoting openness in the public sector and this approach is therefore to be
commended.
The dominant trend in all countries is to make more and more information available on a proactive basis,
particularly online, whether or not this is required under a right to information law. This can promote
a number of effi ciencies for the public sector, as well as better service provision, both as refl ected
tendencies to move to ever more signifi cant forms of e-government. Given the relative ease and low cost
of proactive publication over the Internet, it only makes sense that this should be promoted, among other
things because it serves as a means to reduce the number of (relatively costly) requests for information.
It is likely the case that the request load in countries which upload actively is far less than it would be if
they did not do this. The Indian law expressly recognises the role of proactive publication in reducing the
number of requests for information, specifi cally requiring public bodies to endeavour to increase proactive
publication to this end.
147