COURSE-II: OPTIONAL-I: RIGHT TO INFORMATION
UNIT -I
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS AND SUMMARY NOTES
Course teacher: Dr. Samina Nahid Baig
I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION IN
SWEDEN, USA AND UK
Right to Information (hereinafter read as RTI) which is the cynosure of this discourse
is not something new. In fact, there is a long history at international level towards the
attainment of this right and mobilization of the masses for achieving it. With
development of human ideals and establishment of democratic governments in most
of the civilized countries, this topic came to the fore. The United States and Sweden
constitute the two main models for Freedom of Information. While the Swedish law is
a precedent to the American one by 200 years, both are considered important legal
precedents that helped shape other Freedom of Information (hereinafter read as FOI)
laws around the world.
i) Sweden
In Sweden and Finland, 2006 is observed as the 240th Anniversary of the Freedom of
Information. The world’s first freedom of information legislation was adopted by the
Swedish parliament in 1766. The enlightenment thinker and politician Anders
Chydenius (1729-1803), from the Finnish city of Kokkola, played a crucial role in
creating the new law. Sweden is a constitutional monarchy, with a king or queen as
the head of state (the King or Queen who occupies the throne of Sweden in accordance
with the Act of Succession shall be the Head of State). But like in most liberal
democracies, the royal head of state has no real political power. The Swedish system
is unique because of a high degree of institutional autonomy underlying power
dispersal to various levels of government. The Swedish system is known for ―its
ideology of local government, which basically means that local governments enjoy a
great deal of autonomy, limited only by the legislative powers of its national
counterpart.
The father of the Swedish Freedom of Information Act (hereinafter read as FOIA),
Chydenius, was a member of the Captions party who introduced freedom of
information as a means of ―promoting social reforms and opposing the supremacy of
the nobility. Chynedius was inspired by John Locke among other political philosophers
during that era (which is known in Sweden as ―the age of Liberty). John Locke saw
―the supreme power of the State residing in a legislature and behind the legislature
in the people. The people would govern, but ―they were not the government.
Chydenius considered the introduction of the right to access for citizens as his greatest
lifetime achievement. The Swedish parliament passed the legislation in 1766, and
established the world’s first parliamentary Ombudsman (the word itself is Swedish
for delegate and has been imported directly into the English language). Birkinshaw
observes that ―a very large degree of Swedish public administration is depoliticized
in so far as many, sometimes important, decisions are not taken by political overlords.
The principle of openness (in Swedish public sector) has been long enshrined in
1
,Swedish politics. The major underlying incentive for adopting the FOIA in Sweden, was
―an information-starved political opposition that was given a rare chance to pass
legislation that would grant them and all citizens access to government-held
documents and information. The introduction to the Swedish Constitution describes a
time of great change. The death of Carl XII in 1718 brought to an end not only Sweden’s
great power status but autocratic rule as well. The pendulum now swung back in the
other direction. A new form of government took shape, which became significantly
known as the Age of Liberty government. The basis for the Swedish FOI system is found
in the Swedish Constitution (in the basic principles of the form of government): ―All
public power in Sweden proceeds from the people. Swedish democracy is founded on
the free formation of opinion and on universal and equal suffrage. Openness and
transparency are vital parts of Swedish democracy. The democratic society is protected
by four fundamental laws: the Instrument of Government, the Freedom of the Press
Act, the Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression and the Act of Succession. These
laws make up the Swedish Constitution and they take precedence over all other laws.
The constitution states that all citizens have the right to freely seek information,
organise demonstrations, form political parties and practice their religion. Freedom of
the press is based on freedom of expression and speech – a cornerstone of most
democracies. In 1766, Sweden became the first country in the world to write freedom
of the press into its constitution. The Freedom of the Press Act states that those in
authority must be held accountable and all information must be freely available. The
identities of sources who provide publishers, editors or news agencies with
information are protected, and journalists can never be forced to reveal their sources.
But the right to express an opinion is not an absolute right. When abused, freedom of
speech can be offensive, incite discrimination or violence, or have negative
consequences for an individual or society. Suspected crimes against the freedom of
press or expression laws are dealt with by the non-political Office of the Chancellor of
Justice. The principle of freedom of information means that the general public and the
mass media have access to official records, which means that they have the
opportunity to scrutinise the activities of government on all levels – national, regional
and local. Transparency reduces the risk of power being abused. Civil servants and
others who work for the government are also free to inform the media or outsiders.
However, certain documents can be kept secret – for example if they involve matters
of national security. Chapter 2, Article 1 of the Instrument of Government’s guarantees
that all citizens have the right of: ―freedom of information: that is, the freedom to
procure and receive information and otherwise acquaint oneself with the utterances
of others. Specific rules on access are contained in the Freedom of the Press Act, which
was first adopted in 1766. The current version was adopted in 1949 and amended in
1976. Sweden was the first to enforce the policy of openness in administration. There
all governmental information is public unless certain matters are specifically listed as
exemptions from the general rule. They have provided for a system of appeal against
the wrongful withholding of information by public officials, as long ago as 1766. It
provided constitutional safeguards under Freedom of Press Act, 1766, the oldest and
probably still the most liberal of its kind in the world. It has been revised and
modernized a number of times, most recently in 1978. Sweden has proved that
2
, legitimate national interests can as well be safeguarded under conditions of
administrative openness. Sweden has established cultures that access to government
department and documents as a right and non-access an exception. The principle gives
any one, actually even aliens, the right to turn to a State or municipal agency and ask
to be shown any document kept in their files, regardless of whether the document
concerns him personally or not. Officials are legally required to comply and even to
supply copies of the document requested if this is feasible. In Sweden and other
Scandinavian countries documents dealing with national security, foreign policy and
foreign affairs can be withheld from public scrutiny but the government is bound to
give a written statement quoting legal authority for withholding the document.
ii) United States of America
The US constitutional fathers created the three arms of government legislative
(Congress), executive (President) and judiciary (the Courts); the separation of powers
accounts for a system of checks and balances. At the heart of the US political system is
the concept of the balance of power. According to some sources, the US is indeed an
important role model for Freedom of Information worldwide. Lidberg (2006) notes
that, ―the US FOI model grew out of a global move towards more open government
following World War II.
America and democracy are generally synonymous. America apparently proclaims it to
the torchbearer of the plethora of democratic rights that ought to be the part of a true
democratic framework. The same applies on the dispensation of information too.
Antipathy towards the inherent secrecy is therefore not a surprising attribute
exhibited by the Americans. Schwartz observes, ―Americans firmly believe in the
health effects of publicity and have a strong antipathy to the inherent secretiveness of
government agencies. The Freedom of Information Act, 1966 and The Administrative
Procedure Act, 1946 are two main statutes which confer RTI. The Constitution of
America does not deal specifically with RTI. However, such right is considered to be
corollary of the First Amendment freedoms. In America there are three Acts which
upheld the freedom of press and information. (A) Freedom of Information Act was
made in 1966, which was amended in 1974 to make it more effective, (B) The Privacy
Act, 1974 protected individual privacy against the misuse of federal records while
granting access to records concerning them which are maintained by federal agencies
and (C) The Government in the Sunshine Act, 1976 provided that meetings of
government agencies shall be open to the public. The US Supreme Court has recognized
the right to know more than fifty years ago. The right to freedom of speech and press
has broad scope. This freedom embraces the right to distribute literature and
necessarily protects the right to receive it. "First Amendment contains no specific
guarantee of access to publications. The basis of right to know is the freedom of speech,
which is protected under Bill of Rights. The policy behind the Freedom of Information
Act is to make disclosure a general rule and not the exception, to provide equal rights
of access to all individuals, to place burden on the government to justify the
withholding of a document, not on the person who requests it, to provide right to seek
injunctive relief in the court if individuals are denied access improperly. Right to know
is the cornerstone of citizen participation. Under the Information Act any person, nor
3
UNIT -I
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS AND SUMMARY NOTES
Course teacher: Dr. Samina Nahid Baig
I. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION IN
SWEDEN, USA AND UK
Right to Information (hereinafter read as RTI) which is the cynosure of this discourse
is not something new. In fact, there is a long history at international level towards the
attainment of this right and mobilization of the masses for achieving it. With
development of human ideals and establishment of democratic governments in most
of the civilized countries, this topic came to the fore. The United States and Sweden
constitute the two main models for Freedom of Information. While the Swedish law is
a precedent to the American one by 200 years, both are considered important legal
precedents that helped shape other Freedom of Information (hereinafter read as FOI)
laws around the world.
i) Sweden
In Sweden and Finland, 2006 is observed as the 240th Anniversary of the Freedom of
Information. The world’s first freedom of information legislation was adopted by the
Swedish parliament in 1766. The enlightenment thinker and politician Anders
Chydenius (1729-1803), from the Finnish city of Kokkola, played a crucial role in
creating the new law. Sweden is a constitutional monarchy, with a king or queen as
the head of state (the King or Queen who occupies the throne of Sweden in accordance
with the Act of Succession shall be the Head of State). But like in most liberal
democracies, the royal head of state has no real political power. The Swedish system
is unique because of a high degree of institutional autonomy underlying power
dispersal to various levels of government. The Swedish system is known for ―its
ideology of local government, which basically means that local governments enjoy a
great deal of autonomy, limited only by the legislative powers of its national
counterpart.
The father of the Swedish Freedom of Information Act (hereinafter read as FOIA),
Chydenius, was a member of the Captions party who introduced freedom of
information as a means of ―promoting social reforms and opposing the supremacy of
the nobility. Chynedius was inspired by John Locke among other political philosophers
during that era (which is known in Sweden as ―the age of Liberty). John Locke saw
―the supreme power of the State residing in a legislature and behind the legislature
in the people. The people would govern, but ―they were not the government.
Chydenius considered the introduction of the right to access for citizens as his greatest
lifetime achievement. The Swedish parliament passed the legislation in 1766, and
established the world’s first parliamentary Ombudsman (the word itself is Swedish
for delegate and has been imported directly into the English language). Birkinshaw
observes that ―a very large degree of Swedish public administration is depoliticized
in so far as many, sometimes important, decisions are not taken by political overlords.
The principle of openness (in Swedish public sector) has been long enshrined in
1
,Swedish politics. The major underlying incentive for adopting the FOIA in Sweden, was
―an information-starved political opposition that was given a rare chance to pass
legislation that would grant them and all citizens access to government-held
documents and information. The introduction to the Swedish Constitution describes a
time of great change. The death of Carl XII in 1718 brought to an end not only Sweden’s
great power status but autocratic rule as well. The pendulum now swung back in the
other direction. A new form of government took shape, which became significantly
known as the Age of Liberty government. The basis for the Swedish FOI system is found
in the Swedish Constitution (in the basic principles of the form of government): ―All
public power in Sweden proceeds from the people. Swedish democracy is founded on
the free formation of opinion and on universal and equal suffrage. Openness and
transparency are vital parts of Swedish democracy. The democratic society is protected
by four fundamental laws: the Instrument of Government, the Freedom of the Press
Act, the Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression and the Act of Succession. These
laws make up the Swedish Constitution and they take precedence over all other laws.
The constitution states that all citizens have the right to freely seek information,
organise demonstrations, form political parties and practice their religion. Freedom of
the press is based on freedom of expression and speech – a cornerstone of most
democracies. In 1766, Sweden became the first country in the world to write freedom
of the press into its constitution. The Freedom of the Press Act states that those in
authority must be held accountable and all information must be freely available. The
identities of sources who provide publishers, editors or news agencies with
information are protected, and journalists can never be forced to reveal their sources.
But the right to express an opinion is not an absolute right. When abused, freedom of
speech can be offensive, incite discrimination or violence, or have negative
consequences for an individual or society. Suspected crimes against the freedom of
press or expression laws are dealt with by the non-political Office of the Chancellor of
Justice. The principle of freedom of information means that the general public and the
mass media have access to official records, which means that they have the
opportunity to scrutinise the activities of government on all levels – national, regional
and local. Transparency reduces the risk of power being abused. Civil servants and
others who work for the government are also free to inform the media or outsiders.
However, certain documents can be kept secret – for example if they involve matters
of national security. Chapter 2, Article 1 of the Instrument of Government’s guarantees
that all citizens have the right of: ―freedom of information: that is, the freedom to
procure and receive information and otherwise acquaint oneself with the utterances
of others. Specific rules on access are contained in the Freedom of the Press Act, which
was first adopted in 1766. The current version was adopted in 1949 and amended in
1976. Sweden was the first to enforce the policy of openness in administration. There
all governmental information is public unless certain matters are specifically listed as
exemptions from the general rule. They have provided for a system of appeal against
the wrongful withholding of information by public officials, as long ago as 1766. It
provided constitutional safeguards under Freedom of Press Act, 1766, the oldest and
probably still the most liberal of its kind in the world. It has been revised and
modernized a number of times, most recently in 1978. Sweden has proved that
2
, legitimate national interests can as well be safeguarded under conditions of
administrative openness. Sweden has established cultures that access to government
department and documents as a right and non-access an exception. The principle gives
any one, actually even aliens, the right to turn to a State or municipal agency and ask
to be shown any document kept in their files, regardless of whether the document
concerns him personally or not. Officials are legally required to comply and even to
supply copies of the document requested if this is feasible. In Sweden and other
Scandinavian countries documents dealing with national security, foreign policy and
foreign affairs can be withheld from public scrutiny but the government is bound to
give a written statement quoting legal authority for withholding the document.
ii) United States of America
The US constitutional fathers created the three arms of government legislative
(Congress), executive (President) and judiciary (the Courts); the separation of powers
accounts for a system of checks and balances. At the heart of the US political system is
the concept of the balance of power. According to some sources, the US is indeed an
important role model for Freedom of Information worldwide. Lidberg (2006) notes
that, ―the US FOI model grew out of a global move towards more open government
following World War II.
America and democracy are generally synonymous. America apparently proclaims it to
the torchbearer of the plethora of democratic rights that ought to be the part of a true
democratic framework. The same applies on the dispensation of information too.
Antipathy towards the inherent secrecy is therefore not a surprising attribute
exhibited by the Americans. Schwartz observes, ―Americans firmly believe in the
health effects of publicity and have a strong antipathy to the inherent secretiveness of
government agencies. The Freedom of Information Act, 1966 and The Administrative
Procedure Act, 1946 are two main statutes which confer RTI. The Constitution of
America does not deal specifically with RTI. However, such right is considered to be
corollary of the First Amendment freedoms. In America there are three Acts which
upheld the freedom of press and information. (A) Freedom of Information Act was
made in 1966, which was amended in 1974 to make it more effective, (B) The Privacy
Act, 1974 protected individual privacy against the misuse of federal records while
granting access to records concerning them which are maintained by federal agencies
and (C) The Government in the Sunshine Act, 1976 provided that meetings of
government agencies shall be open to the public. The US Supreme Court has recognized
the right to know more than fifty years ago. The right to freedom of speech and press
has broad scope. This freedom embraces the right to distribute literature and
necessarily protects the right to receive it. "First Amendment contains no specific
guarantee of access to publications. The basis of right to know is the freedom of speech,
which is protected under Bill of Rights. The policy behind the Freedom of Information
Act is to make disclosure a general rule and not the exception, to provide equal rights
of access to all individuals, to place burden on the government to justify the
withholding of a document, not on the person who requests it, to provide right to seek
injunctive relief in the court if individuals are denied access improperly. Right to know
is the cornerstone of citizen participation. Under the Information Act any person, nor
3
