A Thailand-based journalist emailed three questions on the proposed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). As you may already know, the latter was not ratified by the House of Representatives (HOR) when it suspended its session yesterday.

I had actually written about the proposed FOIA in the recent past. You may find the links here:

• Proposed Freedom of Information Act and media repression (Dec. 15, 2009)
• Position paper on the proposed Freedom of Information Act (Feb. 18, 2009)

The details of my answers to the journalist’s three questions may be found in the two articles: Please read them to properly contextualize my general answers below.

How important is the right to information act to the country today?

I’m not too enthusiastic about the passage of the proposed FOIA because it could make things harder for journalists in gathering information. The crucial provisions on disclosure of confidential documents after a certain period of time is also absent. There is also no special provision in the handling of urgent inquiries of journalists who have deadlines to beat.

If ratified, what changes would it bring compared to previous media laws in the country? Were the media laws passed before not enough? Why not?

In my opinion, it provides an enabling law to the constitutional guarantee of freedom of information, which is good for the general public. The practice of the journalism profession, however, may be compromised due to the prescribed waiting period for processing requests for information. Media laws, in this context, are not strengthened and in fact weakened, depending on how the FOIA (once it’s passed into law) will be implemented by the next administration.

Do you feel any resistance in Congress regarding the bill’s ratification? Why or why not?

The resistance among legislators is rooted in their overall lack of transparency and accountability. The general public, as I said, would benefit from disclosure of selected government transactions.