2024-09-05 03:01:00
The national government decided to amend the provisions of the Public Information Disclosure Act. The changes approved by the executive branch act limit the provision of private information about public officials by limiting the information that can be requested.
Law No. 27,275 seeks to ensure that everyone can request, search, access and disseminate information, records and documents held by the State without having to explain the reasons and purposes.
Decree No. 780/2024 regulates certain aspects of the above-mentioned legislation, in particular article 3, “to ensure the full exercise” of the right to information.
The regulation aims to “clarify the scope of the concept of public information, which includes matters of public interest related to the activities of the state and its control, and essentially excludes information belonging to the private domain of officials or magistrates, especially when the application is intended to enter Typical family area.
Therefore, it stipulates that “consultation regarding information not relevant to the administration of the State goes beyond the purpose of Law No. 27,275 and its amendments and protections, and therefore the State Public Administration is not obliged to provide such information.”
Civil society organizations across the country, as well as Argentinian and international news entities, expressed their opposition to President Javier Milley’s decree, arguing that it seeks to limit the state administration’s right to access public information.
They pointed out that this increases confidentiality and provides discretion to define what is a public document and what information can be considered from the private domain of the authorities, and gives the government special protection, at the discretion of the government.
“Decree No. 780/24 represents a serious setback in the interpretation of the right to information in accordance with international human rights standards and anti-corruption and creates a regulatory framework of discretion through which governments and institutions politically define the rights of officials. Subjective decisions will take precedence over the right to access information in the hands of the state,” said the statement, which also called for the invalidation of the decree and was signed by other associations such as Poder Ciudadano, Fopea and Amnesty International.
In turn, the Argentine Association of News Entities (Adepa) noted that “such regulations are applied without taking into account the principles contained in Law No. 27,275, in particular the ‘presumption of publicity’, ‘maximum disclosure’ and ‘maximum access’,” they It would lead to questionable behavior by officials and lead to an impoverishment of public debate, an important input into democratic institutions.
Public information is not the exclusive property of the government in power, but of citizens. More transparency is more democracy. Instead, opacity leaves room for any suspicion of corruption. Withholding the naturalization of data, statistics or any information related to management is not only a criminal act, since it is not in compliance with the law or signed international agreements, but also seriously damages the institutional nature of a city, a province or a country. Just like this case.
When access to information becomes bogged down in ambiguous explanations, countless bureaucratic requirements, or deadlines that render answers obsolete, we begin to forget what the contours of a full democracy are.
1725525878
#information #democracy
