|
Thailand's Information Law
By: Nakorn Serirak
July 28, 2000
BANGKOK
- -It has been only two years since the Thai information law,
the Official Information Act, B.E. 2540 (1997)(OIA), came into effect.
The Act, however, has become more popular and has been widely accepted
as useful to the public. It has contributed to the country's political
reform agenda even as it has also shaken the traditional bureaucratic
system. The law plays a significant role in changing the attitude of Thai
government servants toward the official information administration.
Background
The OIA was first drafted by the government under Prime Minister Anand
Panyarachun, the so-called "transparency government," and had to wait
for the approval by parliament in July 1997. It became effective on December
9, 1997.
The
principle behind the OIA is the guarantee of the people's right to have
full access to government information. According to the Act, almost all
official data and information should be revealed to the public, while
only some categories of information that the State can still keep confidential
are exempted from disclosure. Should the State agency refuse to data,
citizens still have the right to appeal to the Official Information Commission.
The
OIA ensures the people's right to access government information, and this
includes the right to inspect, to request for a copy, to have advice,
to make a complaint and appeal, to ask the State to correct or change
personal information. Such right is bestowed upon any individual whether
he has any involvement or relation with the information he requests.
This
new principle turned down the conventions and traditional practices of
State officials whose had always believed that government information
must be kept strictly and confidentially for official uses only. Officials
had traditionally responded to public demand for access with the attitude
that information disclosure was the exception while most data were kept
secret.
State
Agency Duties on Information Disclosure
According to the OIA, State agencies—i.e. central administration, provincial
administration, local administration, state enterprise, government agency
attached to the National Assembly, courts but only with respect to affairs
unassociated with the trial and adjudication of cases, professional supervisory
organization, independent agency of the State, and such other agency as
prescribed in the Ministerial Regulation—are supposed to disclose information
through three mechanisms:
A.
Publish the following official information in the Government Gazette:
1. the structure and organization
of its operation;
2. the summary of important powers
and duties and operational methods;
3. a contacting address for the purpose
of contacting the State agency in order to request and obtain information
or advice;
4. by-laws, resolutions of the Council
of Ministers, regulations, orders, circulars, rules, work pattern, policies
or interpretations only insofar as they are made or issued to have the
same force as by-laws and intended to be of general application to private
individuals concerned;
A
State agency shall, for dissemination purposes, compile and make available
the said information for sale, disposal or distribution at its office.
B.
Make available at least the following official information for public
inspection:
1. a result of consideration or a
decision which has a direct effect on a private individual, including
a dissenting opinion and an order relating thereto;
2. a policy or an interpretation which
does not fall within the scope of the requirement of publication in the
Government Gazette;
3. a work-plan, project and annual
expenditure estimate of the year of its preparation;
4. a manual or order relating to work
procedure of State officials which affects the rights and duties of private
individuals;
5. a concession contract, agreement
of a monopolistic nature or joint venture agreement with a private individual
for the provision of public services;
6. a resolution of the Council of
Ministers or of such Board, Tribunal, Commission or Committee as established
by law or by a resolution of the Council of Ministers; provided that the
titles of the technical reports, fact reports or information relied on
in such consideration shall also be specified;
C.
Provide information according to individual requests:
If
any person makes a request for any official information, other than the
official information already published in the Government Gazette, or already
made available for public inspection, or already made available for public
studies, and such a request makes a reasonably apprehensible mention of
the intended information, the responsible State agency shall provide it
to such a person within a reasonable period of time.
Any
person, who considers that a State agency fails to publish the information
in the Government Gazette, fails to make the information available for
public inspection, fails to provide him with the information, violates
or fails to comply with this Act, or delays in performing its duties,
or considers that he does not receive convenience without reasonable cause,
is entitled to lodge a complaint with the Commission.
Therefore,
we can see that most types of the official information are subject to
disclosure while only a few are declared as exemptions. The OIA prescribes
the types of information that are not subject to disclosure, as follows:
Official
information that may jeopardize the Royal Institution shall not be disclosed.
A State agency or State official may issue an order prohibiting the disclosure
of official information falling under any of the following descriptions,
having regard to the performance of duties of the State agency under the
law, public interests and the interests of the private individuals concerned:
-
the disclosure thereof will jeopardize the national
security, international relations, or national economic or financial security;
- the
disclosure thereof will result in the decline in the efficiency of law
enforcement or failure to achieve its objectives, whether or not it is
related to litigation, protection, suppression, verification, inspection,
or knowledge of the source of the information;
- an opinion or advice given within
the State agency with regard to the performance of any act, not including
a technical report, fact report or information relied on for giving opinion
or recommendation internally;
-the disclosure thereof will endanger
the life or safety of any person;
- a medical report or personal information
the disclosure of which will unreasonably encroach upon the right of privacy;
- an official information protected
by law against disclosure or an information given by a person and intended
to be kept undisclosed;
-an order prohibiting the disclosure
of official information may be issued subject to any condition whatsoever,
but there shall also be stated therein the type of information and the
reasons for non-disclosure. It shall be deemed that the issuance of an
order disclosing official information is the exclusive discretion of State
officials in consecutive levels of command; provided that a person who
makes a request for the information may appeal to the Information Disclosure
Tribunal (IDT) as provided in this Act.
Implementation
of the Official Information Act
Implementation in 1999
1.
Complaint cases
-
There were 113 complaints, 80 of which were solved
while the remaining 33 are under processing.
- Most
of the cases are complaints about the officials who didn't give good services
and didn't deliver information to the people who requested.
- Complaints are four times more than
in 1998, with only 32 cases.
2.
Appeal cases
- There were 78 appeal cases. 44
cases have been solved by the IDT. 13 cases are now under consideration
and 21 cases are under process by the Office of the OIC. (OOIC)
- For all 57 cases, 49 cases were
taken care of by the IDT for social and national administration affairs
and 8 cases by the IDT for economic affairs.
- 56% of the appeal cases are concerned
with disciplinary investigation documents. 23% are information of such
current affairs as the investigation result of the corruption in the Ministry
of Public Health, the bid for asset sales by the Financial Sector Restructuring
Authority, and 21% are information related to concession, contract and
meeting report.
Problems
in Implementation
After 2 years of the implementation of the OIA, the OIC has concluded
major difficulties in government information disclosure practices.
1. Most people
neither understand key elements of the Act nor realize their own right.
Most people do not know how to utilize the law in compliance with their
demand to have access to the State information. People cannot exercise
their right, as they do not know the procedures.
2. As
for government agencies, the high-ranking officials do not understand
the law and do not know how to implement the Act. More than this, as they
lack adequate knowledge of the law and the main principles of information
disclosure service in order to achieve people's right to know, they thus
cannot administer the office in accordance with the Act. Another significant
aspect is they have less skill in exercising discretion.
3. Apart from high-level officials,
bureaucrats who service requests for information disclosure also suffer
from deficient knowledge about the Act. They are not yet accustomed to
the new principles of information disclosure. They also have negative
attitudes towards the Act. Some feel that the Act puts more burden on
them, and like those at the executive level, they have less experience
in implementing the law, in terms of servicing procedures, information
disclosure and exercising judgment on the kind of information that may
be disclosed.
Strategic
Guidelines for 2000
To solve the problem and overcome such difficulties, the OIC has prepared
the strategic guidelines for the year 2000 onward as follows:
1.
To promote and develop the acknowledgement of
the Act's content, its utilization, the mechanism and the procedures to
utilize the Act to meet people's right to access information
- State agencies
should provide more training to increase knowledge of the law as well
as to change the attitudes about it and enhance their law-enforcement
skills. This should be done on the different target groups, ranging from
executive officials, legal officials, officials in charge of OIA and top
management staff of local administrative bodies. The training should be
aimed at encouraging State officials to know the Act well and realize
its significance. This will help improve the capacity and efficiency of
the agencies and of the nation as a whole.
-
More public relations campaigns will be implemented
as a means to educate people about the law and the mechanisms of using
the law to access State information. Activities should be concentrated
on building the awareness of the public and educating people that the
Information Act is important as it ensures their right to know. They thus
should be more involved in employing the Act to get access to information,
which is crucial in making the government more accountable and transparent.
- The mass media
will be encouraged to play a more active role in the information community
as the media will be of great help in promoting people's freedom of information.
The media can help enhance knowledge about the law and teach the public
how to use it. The media can also act as a representative of the public
by using the law and getting access to State information in the name of
the people. Media training is thus recommended in the coming year.
2.
To develop the administration of State agencies
- To develop
the reform of the documentary management of all government offices to
be more efficient, more systematic, eventually leading to nationwide linkage
in compliance with the OIA implementation. Each agency might manage its
own information by categorizing what information could be released at
the level of certain officials in charge and what should be taken into
consideration by higher-level officers.
- The
OOIC will develop the manual or handbook for State officials in order
to standardize procedures and mechanisms on the enforcement of the information
law.
-
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) should be carried
out in all State agencies, by both internal auditors and external inspectors,
even from academic institutions, university and NGOs. The objective of
the M&E is to follow up the understanding and motivation of officials
and also the satisfaction of the people in the State information disclosure
services. The M&E will help the OIC to improve the administration of the
law, to develop strategies and guidelines, and to supervise the implementation
of the law to eventually achieve the goal of promoting freedom of information.
3.
To improve the Monitoring and Evaluation of the
OIA implementation of State agencies
The
OIC proposed guidelines to the cabinet in November 1999 and 4 measures
were approved to follow up the implementation of the OIA by all government
agencies:
- All State
agencies have to report their activities on implementing OIA to the OIC
twice a year
- The
Office of the Permanent Secretary of the Prime Minister's Office will
be the main agency in charge of monitoring and evaluation, through the
annual operation inspection plan of the Prime Minister Inspector General
- All ministries
and departments must take this evaluation as a significant policy by appointing
the inspector general of each minister to be responsible for this mandate.
- The inspector
general of the department of local administration will be responsible
for the M&E of local entities.
4.
To develop the efficiency and capacity of the
OOIC
The OOIC was established to serve as the secretary
and assistant to the OIC. The office is small compared to the scope of
work in dealing with 8,775 State agencies around the country. To serve
the commission and the State agencies, in order to achieve the goal of
promoting the freedom of information, the OOIC should be developed to
perform as a small but highly efficient office. This year, the OIC has
set up the development strategy for the office to be organized with potential
to serve at its best capacity in evaluation and monitoring. Concurrently,
close coordination with State agency will be more emphasized in order
to assist and facilitate proper and efficient implementation of the Act.
Latest
Cabinet's Resolution
The government of Thailand takes the issue of freedom of information as
a key policy, since it is considered the most essential part of the political
reform portfolio of the country. To promote people's right to know is
a crucial part of a democratic society and assists in building up civil
society.
Such
recommendation was proposed by the OIC to the government early this year
and the cabinet, on February 1, 2000, approved the proposal and issued
the following confirmed guidelines:
-
All State agencies have to speed up the strict enforcement
of the OIA.
- Concerned
agencies should support the budget, staff, staff development, to the OOIC,
in order to efficiently achieve the goal of the information law.
- The representative of ministries
to the OIC must work for the commission at least 2 years in order to have
the OIC perform continuously.
- The Prime Minister's Office together
with all State agencies should consider the development of the information
management and documentary administration to be a systematic one with
nationwide network.
- The promotion of high ranking officials
and the recruitment of new staff as legal officers should take the capacity
and the performance in the management according to the OIA as a standardized
consideration.
Concluding
Remarks
The OIA has been a crucial component for democratic development as it
encourages people to enjoy more political participation by directly expressing
their opinions and proposing their needs or suggestions to the State.
This should help make the government more accountable and more transparent.
In order to participate well and efficiently, people should have full
access to State information and should know what is going on through State
policy. People should know all what the government does or will do. The
OIA ascertains the government's vision of "what the government does or
knows, people have the Right to Know."
However,
the OIA is a new law, and the new concept of freedom of information is
totally new to both the Thai State officials and to the people. Thai society
thus needs some time to learn about and take advantage of the Information
Law. State officials have to understand more clearly the procedures of
law enforcement so that they know how to provide information services
and disclose information disclosure to meet public demand. Meanwhile,
people should recognize their own right to know and know how to utilize
the Information Act as a means to access State information. Thai society
should recognize that information law is an essential aspect of establishing
accountable and transparent government and a crucial part of building
civil society. <
Nakoen
Serirak is head of the Research and Development Department of the Office
of the Official Information Commission.
Back
|
