The Freedom of Information Act—a reconciled version of the Senate and House versions– died in the final day of the 14th Congress, after being approved by the bicameral conference committee and ratified by the Senate in February of this year.
It was the farthest the bill had gone since the first version filed in 1992 (See sidebar, Is this the end? Fourteen years of effort—but still counting). Widely expected to pass, among other reasons because of assurances to that effect by House Speaker Prospero Nograles and Malacanang’s claim that it was supporting it, the bill can be reintroduced in the 15th Congress—but it will have to start from square one.
To help speed it along, the advocates of the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act have asked the next president to help realize the passage into law of the long-delayed bill that’s meant to help ensure transparency and accountability in governance.
President-elect Benigno Simeon “Noynoy” Aquino III, who was among the senators who voted for the Senate Bill 3308, the Senate version of the bill, responded by promising to make congressional passage of the FOI bill a priority of his legislative agenda once he assumes office this July.
Inquirer.net
Philstar.com
GMAnews.tv
Congress.gov.ph
Minimalgovernment.net
Aer.ph
Ansa-eap.net
Access to Information Network
Right to Know Right Now! Campaign
Aruna Roy is a leading Right to Information activist in India. She helped in demanding records and uncovering irregularities in Rajasthan, a village in India. This in turn led to the passage of the Indian Law on Right to Information in 2000.
However, the window for the Freedom of Information (FOI) bill is about to shut as well.
The FOI bill can only be ratified until Friday, June 4, right before the House of Representatives adjourns sine die. But the 14th Congress still needs to canvass the votes for the President and the Vice President.
If Congress fails to ratify FOI bill within that period, the bill goes back to square one. Its advocates will have to lobby again, this time the 15th congress.
The FOI bill, if enacted into law, guarantees access to data held by the state in all its affairs, and provides penalties for officials who fail to disclose or release the requested information. This bill is supported by Article 3 Section 7 of the Bill of Rights which recognizes the people’s right to know on matters of public concern.
Fourteen years after the bill was first submitted to the legislative department, the FOI bill was finally approved by the bicameral conference committee and ratified by the Senate February of this year, just before it adjourned for the elections.
According to reports, however, the members of the House of Representatives failed to ratify it because of the lack of quorum. This is the nearest the FOI bill has reached prior to passing.
The Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA) is concerned that media groups and individuals remain vulnerable, especially as tension rises and spreads in Thailand. Following government’s move to permanently dismantle the rally site in Bangkok, there are fears that protests will spread to outlying provinces, and along with them, a general hazard—and even hostility—towards the covering media.
The situation is certainly not helped by reports that some radio stations sympathetic to the Red Shirts have been engaged in incendiary commentary. SEAPA urges restraint and responsibility, even as it also reminds government to resist any temptation to restrict the flow of news and opinions in the country. SEAPA reiterates its call on all sides to the crisis to respect the important role journalists play in disseminating news and commentary, and in providing reliable information that all stakeholders need to arrive at some peaceful resolution.
At the same time, SEAPA reiterates the call made by the Thai Journalists Association on all members of the media to practice ethical and responsible journalism, to not take sides, and instead to simply provide as much reliable information and commentary as they could to help Thai society understand and navigate their current crisis.
The last elections demonstrated how some of the current laws in the Philippines infringe on press freedom.
One such law is Republic Act 9006 or The Fair Election Act. On paper, the law seems a genuine attempt to level the playing field for all candidates during elections. The law mandates the State, “during the election period, (to) supervise or regulate the enjoyment or utilization of all franchises or permits for the operation of media of communication or information to guarantee or ensure equal opportunity for public service, including access to media time and space, and the equitable right to reply, for public information campaigns and fora among candidates and assure free, orderly, honest, peaceful and credible elections.”
The law’s intent seems laudable, but its implementing rules and regulations are violative of press freedom.
As the 2010 elections draw near, journalists have urged the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas (Association of Broadcasters of the Philippines, KBP) to look into radio blocktimers, particularly those funded by political candidates and government agencies. Blocktimers are individuals who buy blocks of radio time for programs which they then market to various advertisers and interests.
Given the special nature of the 2010 elections, the media’s role as credible and critical sources of information and analysis during the election season bears watching. This year’s elections provide an opportunity to help the media plan for rational and balanced coverage: to draw out candidate views and plans on critical issues, and to promote the democratic dialogue between candidates and the voters.
The Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA) first published this report on Dec. 9, 2008.
_____________________________________________________________________
Excessive use of defamation and lese majeste charges by opposing political groups and authorities in Thailand to curb free expression on the Internet has forced a coalition of Internet users comprising media reformers, human rights campaigners, webmasters, bloggers, and operators of online news publications, to form a civic network called the Thai Netizens Network, designed to promote and protect cyber liberty.
The non-partisan group, officially launched on Dec. 2, was a spin-off of an earlier initiative called Freedom Against Censorship in Thailand but its mission is much broader than its predecessor’s—that is, to campaign at the national policy level to promote and protect netizens’ rights, freedom of online media as well as civic journalism, and at the same time to promote a self-regulatory framework to ensure responsible use of internet.
According to the network’s coordinator, Supinya Klangnarong, about 400 URLs have been banned over charges related to criminal defamation and lese majeste pending the court’s hearing. “The problem is that cyber-crime police find it difficult to proceed with these cases in court because they could not arrest the suspected offenders,” said Supinya.
There is a growing consensus among journalists and media practitioners around the world that “unethical practice” is slowly killing journalism. The threat has become so serious that the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) last year launched an “Ethical Journalism Initiative.”
The initiative is supposed to be journalism’s response to the challenges the craft faces – the increasing polarization around the globe, the clamor for change in a number of countries on the fringes of development, war and terrorism.
Amid these developments – racial, religious, cultural and political conflicts that most of the time lead to shooting wars – are the media, which most of the time are used by partisan interests to deceive, sow falsehood and speculation, and provoke misunderstanding, hatred and violence.
News organizations and individuals are free to quote, cite, and/or republish articles from the Eye on Ethics website, but proper attribution and link should be made.
Thank you.
