- Email: [email protected]
Freedom of information trends in the information age
92
GOVERNMENT
INFt~RMATl~N
QUARTERLY
Vol.
1/No.
1:1984
federal legal resources and provides basic information on standard federal legal reference materials. The text is divided into three major sections: Statutory Law, Case Law, and Finding Tools. The workbook uses a self-study approach which includes exercises (and answers) at the end of each section. Sections of the workbook, such as “How A Lawsuit or Case Can Become Case Law” would be particularly helpful to the layperson attempting to file a law suit or for an undergraduate student striving to gain familiarity with the judicial system. Most of the sections of the book are designed to assist non-lawyers in answering basic legal questions, however, the section on “Administrative Agency Materials” focuses on very specialized materials, including Department of Interior Decisions, BLM Manuals, and Organic Act Directives. Hence, this section is helpful only to either BLM personnel or persons doing advanced research using administrative agency materials. This section would confuse the neophyte non-BLM researcher. The Appendix, compiled by Professor Richard Surles, Law Librarian, University of Illinois, is intended to give the student more in-depth bibliographic information about the major titles covered in the workbook. The following information is provided for each title: composition of set, arrangement, tinding aids, currency, and special features. The bibliographic information is clear, accurate, and enhanced by photographs, Fin&g rhe LUW, which is designed to provide quick access to legal information, differs from the classic legal research volumes, authored by Jacobstein and Mersky, Cohen and Price, Bitner and Bysiewicz, which are aimed at in-depth analysis of sources for law students and attorneys. In an age when self-help manuals are proliferating, this work, which is heavily illustrated with photographs, charts. and maps, is particularly useful for laypersons, paralegals, and undergraduates. It is highly recommended for academic lisections of law libraries. At braries, public libraries, prison libraries, and “self-help” such a moderate price. this workbook is a tremendous buy.
Freedom of information Trends in the Information Age by Tom Riley and Harold C. Relyea, editors London: Frank Cass. Ltd. (distributed by Biblio Distribution Center, Totowa, NJ). 1983. 172 pages, $27.50. ISBN 07 146-322 1-X.
Reviewed
by Lotte E. Feinberg
Lotte E. Feinberg is a professor at the Department of Government and Public Administration, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York, NY 10019.
A fundamental tenet shared by parlianlenta~ democracies around the world has long been that an informed electorate is essential for maintaining democracy. During the past two decades, an increasing number of these governments have enacted some form of open access statute as one method of increasing citizen participation and administraative accountability. However, as Tom Riley and Harold Relyea demonstrate in fttformurintt
Reviews
93
Trends in the information Age, not surprisingly there is considerable disagreement, even among those who support access, over what and when information should be provided and who should make these decisions. Although Sweden has permitted citizen access to official documents since 1766, the acceptance of this principle and translation to practice is still in its nascent stage in Europe, Scandanavia. the U.S. and the U.K. What Messrs. Riley and Relyea do, as editors and authors of this very compact but ambitious book, is survey the statutory provisions and current status of legislation governing access to documents in ten countries as well as the Council of Europe; examine and analyze the current attempts to revise the U.S. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA); and explore the British reluctance to exchange their traditional predilection for government discretion and confidentiality for a philosophy of openness. This examination of information trends begins with a much needed, though brief, look at the various inte~retations of “freedom of info~ation ” and concludes with two sections useful for researchers. First is an appendix which lists chronologically (1972-1980) the news items which credited as their source the U.S. FOIA. Second is a selected bibliography of works dealing with information and privacy which is organized geographically. As the bibliography suggests, there are still relatively few books which address questions of information policy and an even more limited number which permit a comparative perspective. This book is valuable in that it does both, providing current information on how different countries have responded to calls for access to d~uments as well as examining the legal~dminis~ative issues posed by the American experience and the philosophical/political issues which have retarded the British approach. The book is not for the novice since all authors presume an understanding of different forms of government and at least a familiarity with the U.S. FOIA. At the same time, all authors provide background details, historical perspective, and some offer extensive footnotes. The book, by focusing on statutes, is designed to show what has happened and is continuing to take place as the principle of citizen access to administrative documents is more widely shared. It also introduces some fascinating glimpses of the personal and political factors that influence legislative outcomes. With this as a base it would be valuable, perhaps in a second volume, to compare the way these procedural and substantive statutory differences have affected the acquisition and use of information. Tom Riley provides critical dates and a brief outline of the central philosophy and basic provisions of each country’s statute or proposed statute. His survey lets the reader draw comparisons among the different ways countries have attempted to strike a balance between access and secrecy. Certain categories of documents, such as those pertaining to national security, personal and medical files, and ongoing investigations are almost universally exempt from disclosure. Other disclosure choices vary considerably and linguistic precision is critical to appreciating what is and is not intended in each statute. For example, some countries, such as Norway, define “document” or “record” while others, such as Finland, do not. Similarly, the Netherlands permits release of “official information” while most other countries release “documents.” The choice of statutory language is a product not only of culture and history but also of political bargaining. In three cases, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada. the reader is given an insider’s view as Mr. Riley combines statements of principles and law with discussion of the ways in which outcomes were negotiated. The American Freedom of Information Act of 1966 is very much a product of political negotiation and the American experience using the law has been closely scrutinized by
94
GOVERNMENT
lNF~RA~ATi(~N
QUARTERLY
Vol.
l/No.
l/l984
users (journalists, public interest groups, and industry lobbyists) and members of Congress exercising their oversight responsibilities. The law was substantially revised in 1974 and passed over a Presidential veto; a second, relatively minor adjustment was made in 1976 through an amendment to the Government in the Sunshine Act. Since 198 I Congress has again been considering revisions. However, while the first reforms were aimed at broadening and easing access to documents, the current proposals reflect divided ideologies and conflicting constituent interests and are aimed at restricting access. Harold C. Relyea places his evaluation of proposed changes in historical context and takes a careful, analytical look at the major substantive and procedural changes being considered. He takes complex, highly technical recommendations and neatly packages them into understandable concepts. Although he proceeds from the premise that the strength of a democracy rests on an informed citizenship, his discussion is a non-political assessment of the impact of the proposals. In considering modifications of the Act, James Sasser retraces some of the same ground but his focus is on why he, as a Senator, has chosen to make or abstain from making certain recommendations. His discussion is interesting in that it offers insight into which groups and people carry special weight. It becomes readily apparent that in his oversight capacity this legislator listens to and takes advice from experts inside the government, such as an Associate Attorney General, as well as from interested groups as diverse as the American Newspaper Publishers Ass~iation and the Machines and Allied Products Institute. His recommendations reflect his personal values moderated by the views of a broad spectrum of interests. It remains for the reader, guided perhaps by Dr. Relyea’s analysis, to assess whether the recommendations will or will not be adequate to meet the concerns raised. The British experience has been quite different from the American, as Martin Smith and James Michael make clear in their respective chapters. Mr. Smith of the National Consumer Council recognizes that “there is no cohesive popular movement for open govemment, and not much evidence of any general understanding of the issues.” His concern, then, is to outline what the debate is and should be about. He argues that if change is to occur it must come from an alliance with citizens in their common role as consumers sharing such concerns as air pollution, automotive safety, and health. Because the British debate has only recently begun to take shape, it is not sufficient to identify people with common interests; basic societal values must be explored. James Michael helps to differentiate among what must be, may be, or must not be secret when dealing with information on individuals. This is a debate which has had to be made by each country before it could adopt a policy of access to adnlinistrative documents. 3y having this as the final chapter the reader is drawn back to the basic questions that inform this entire process-how to balance what is in the public’s interest to know while protecting the legitimate rights of privacy for individuals, corporations, and governments. As Information Trends in the Information Age shows, even when there is some general consensus, the specific answers must be tailored to each country’s needs and the balance must continuously be recalibrated.
GOVERNMENT
INFt~RMATl~N
QUARTERLY
Vol.
1/No.
1:1984
federal legal resources and provides basic information on standard federal legal reference materials. The text is divided into three major sections: Statutory Law, Case Law, and Finding Tools. The workbook uses a self-study approach which includes exercises (and answers) at the end of each section. Sections of the workbook, such as “How A Lawsuit or Case Can Become Case Law” would be particularly helpful to the layperson attempting to file a law suit or for an undergraduate student striving to gain familiarity with the judicial system. Most of the sections of the book are designed to assist non-lawyers in answering basic legal questions, however, the section on “Administrative Agency Materials” focuses on very specialized materials, including Department of Interior Decisions, BLM Manuals, and Organic Act Directives. Hence, this section is helpful only to either BLM personnel or persons doing advanced research using administrative agency materials. This section would confuse the neophyte non-BLM researcher. The Appendix, compiled by Professor Richard Surles, Law Librarian, University of Illinois, is intended to give the student more in-depth bibliographic information about the major titles covered in the workbook. The following information is provided for each title: composition of set, arrangement, tinding aids, currency, and special features. The bibliographic information is clear, accurate, and enhanced by photographs, Fin&g rhe LUW, which is designed to provide quick access to legal information, differs from the classic legal research volumes, authored by Jacobstein and Mersky, Cohen and Price, Bitner and Bysiewicz, which are aimed at in-depth analysis of sources for law students and attorneys. In an age when self-help manuals are proliferating, this work, which is heavily illustrated with photographs, charts. and maps, is particularly useful for laypersons, paralegals, and undergraduates. It is highly recommended for academic lisections of law libraries. At braries, public libraries, prison libraries, and “self-help” such a moderate price. this workbook is a tremendous buy.
Freedom of information Trends in the Information Age by Tom Riley and Harold C. Relyea, editors London: Frank Cass. Ltd. (distributed by Biblio Distribution Center, Totowa, NJ). 1983. 172 pages, $27.50. ISBN 07 146-322 1-X.
Reviewed
by Lotte E. Feinberg
Lotte E. Feinberg is a professor at the Department of Government and Public Administration, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York, NY 10019.
A fundamental tenet shared by parlianlenta~ democracies around the world has long been that an informed electorate is essential for maintaining democracy. During the past two decades, an increasing number of these governments have enacted some form of open access statute as one method of increasing citizen participation and administraative accountability. However, as Tom Riley and Harold Relyea demonstrate in fttformurintt
Reviews
93
Trends in the information Age, not surprisingly there is considerable disagreement, even among those who support access, over what and when information should be provided and who should make these decisions. Although Sweden has permitted citizen access to official documents since 1766, the acceptance of this principle and translation to practice is still in its nascent stage in Europe, Scandanavia. the U.S. and the U.K. What Messrs. Riley and Relyea do, as editors and authors of this very compact but ambitious book, is survey the statutory provisions and current status of legislation governing access to documents in ten countries as well as the Council of Europe; examine and analyze the current attempts to revise the U.S. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA); and explore the British reluctance to exchange their traditional predilection for government discretion and confidentiality for a philosophy of openness. This examination of information trends begins with a much needed, though brief, look at the various inte~retations of “freedom of info~ation ” and concludes with two sections useful for researchers. First is an appendix which lists chronologically (1972-1980) the news items which credited as their source the U.S. FOIA. Second is a selected bibliography of works dealing with information and privacy which is organized geographically. As the bibliography suggests, there are still relatively few books which address questions of information policy and an even more limited number which permit a comparative perspective. This book is valuable in that it does both, providing current information on how different countries have responded to calls for access to d~uments as well as examining the legal~dminis~ative issues posed by the American experience and the philosophical/political issues which have retarded the British approach. The book is not for the novice since all authors presume an understanding of different forms of government and at least a familiarity with the U.S. FOIA. At the same time, all authors provide background details, historical perspective, and some offer extensive footnotes. The book, by focusing on statutes, is designed to show what has happened and is continuing to take place as the principle of citizen access to administrative documents is more widely shared. It also introduces some fascinating glimpses of the personal and political factors that influence legislative outcomes. With this as a base it would be valuable, perhaps in a second volume, to compare the way these procedural and substantive statutory differences have affected the acquisition and use of information. Tom Riley provides critical dates and a brief outline of the central philosophy and basic provisions of each country’s statute or proposed statute. His survey lets the reader draw comparisons among the different ways countries have attempted to strike a balance between access and secrecy. Certain categories of documents, such as those pertaining to national security, personal and medical files, and ongoing investigations are almost universally exempt from disclosure. Other disclosure choices vary considerably and linguistic precision is critical to appreciating what is and is not intended in each statute. For example, some countries, such as Norway, define “document” or “record” while others, such as Finland, do not. Similarly, the Netherlands permits release of “official information” while most other countries release “documents.” The choice of statutory language is a product not only of culture and history but also of political bargaining. In three cases, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada. the reader is given an insider’s view as Mr. Riley combines statements of principles and law with discussion of the ways in which outcomes were negotiated. The American Freedom of Information Act of 1966 is very much a product of political negotiation and the American experience using the law has been closely scrutinized by
94
GOVERNMENT
lNF~RA~ATi(~N
QUARTERLY
Vol.
l/No.
l/l984
users (journalists, public interest groups, and industry lobbyists) and members of Congress exercising their oversight responsibilities. The law was substantially revised in 1974 and passed over a Presidential veto; a second, relatively minor adjustment was made in 1976 through an amendment to the Government in the Sunshine Act. Since 198 I Congress has again been considering revisions. However, while the first reforms were aimed at broadening and easing access to documents, the current proposals reflect divided ideologies and conflicting constituent interests and are aimed at restricting access. Harold C. Relyea places his evaluation of proposed changes in historical context and takes a careful, analytical look at the major substantive and procedural changes being considered. He takes complex, highly technical recommendations and neatly packages them into understandable concepts. Although he proceeds from the premise that the strength of a democracy rests on an informed citizenship, his discussion is a non-political assessment of the impact of the proposals. In considering modifications of the Act, James Sasser retraces some of the same ground but his focus is on why he, as a Senator, has chosen to make or abstain from making certain recommendations. His discussion is interesting in that it offers insight into which groups and people carry special weight. It becomes readily apparent that in his oversight capacity this legislator listens to and takes advice from experts inside the government, such as an Associate Attorney General, as well as from interested groups as diverse as the American Newspaper Publishers Ass~iation and the Machines and Allied Products Institute. His recommendations reflect his personal values moderated by the views of a broad spectrum of interests. It remains for the reader, guided perhaps by Dr. Relyea’s analysis, to assess whether the recommendations will or will not be adequate to meet the concerns raised. The British experience has been quite different from the American, as Martin Smith and James Michael make clear in their respective chapters. Mr. Smith of the National Consumer Council recognizes that “there is no cohesive popular movement for open govemment, and not much evidence of any general understanding of the issues.” His concern, then, is to outline what the debate is and should be about. He argues that if change is to occur it must come from an alliance with citizens in their common role as consumers sharing such concerns as air pollution, automotive safety, and health. Because the British debate has only recently begun to take shape, it is not sufficient to identify people with common interests; basic societal values must be explored. James Michael helps to differentiate among what must be, may be, or must not be secret when dealing with information on individuals. This is a debate which has had to be made by each country before it could adopt a policy of access to adnlinistrative documents. 3y having this as the final chapter the reader is drawn back to the basic questions that inform this entire process-how to balance what is in the public’s interest to know while protecting the legitimate rights of privacy for individuals, corporations, and governments. As Information Trends in the Information Age shows, even when there is some general consensus, the specific answers must be tailored to each country’s needs and the balance must continuously be recalibrated.