Controversy in Argentina over Milei’s decree limiting access to public information

Buenos Aires, Sep 3 (EFE).- Argentina is experiencing a new controversy on Tuesday related to the government of Javier Milei and its relationship with the media, after the Executive limited, via decree, the law on access to public information.

Civil organizations and the press remain concerned about the Executive’s regulation of the law on access to public information – published this Monday in the Official Gazette – by which the State is not obliged to provide information on the private life of public officials or anything that is preparatory to a State decision – work papers, prior meetings, etc.

In addition, it increases the criteria for exceptions to provide public information.

For seven years, Argentina has had a law on Access to Public Information, which allows citizens, through a mechanism, the right to access information considered to be of a public nature, which has revealed improper behavior by authorities, has collaborated in the investigation of judicial cases or has shed light on meetings of public officials.

According to the decree signed by Milei, citizens would not be able to inquire about who enters the official residence of Olivos, in the province of Buenos Aires, or how many dogs accompany the president, because the right of access to public information now excludes that which “pertains to the private sphere of the official or magistrate, especially when the request seeks to enter a typically domestic sphere.”

The Citizen Power Foundation highlighted on its social media that “no decree can restrict Access to Public Information beyond what is done by the Law democratically sanctioned by Congress” and recalled that “access to public information is a human right enshrined in international pacts and treaties” and that “information is in the hands of the State but belongs to the citizens.”

The executive director of Poder Ciudadano, Pablo Secchi, told Radio Mitre on Tuesday that the institution is “analyzing” taking the case to court to “declare the decree unconstitutional.” The alternative is for the government to “realize that what it did was wrong” and reverse the decree.

The Argentine Journalism Forum (FOPEA) rejected the changes introduced by Milei’s government, warning that they “imply a serious democratic setback” because “they discourage citizen participation in state affairs and obscure public management,” and warned that they “attack all the principles of active transparency.”

Fopea pointed out that the regulation also introduces an article that establishes that “violation of the principle of good faith by all the parties involved” could lead to the imposition of compensation.

The forum recalled that “it must be presumed as a rule that all information held by public bodies can and should be disclosed” and that “citizens are the owners of public information and not the State, so allowing its knowledge is not a discretionary concession by governments but a regulated imperative.”

.