Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
John Edwards,Ppt
John Edwards,Ppt
John Edwards,Ppt
John Edwards,Ppt
John Edwards,Ppt
John Edwards,Ppt
John Edwards,Ppt
John Edwards,Ppt
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

John Edwards,Ppt

286

Published on

Published in: Business, Sports
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
286
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Freedom of information in New Zealand John Edwards Barrister and Solicitor Wellington, New Zealand
  • 2. This presentation covers <ul><li>Key elements of NZ law </li></ul><ul><li>Similarities/differences with Chilean proposal </li></ul><ul><li>Things we have learned in 25 years of freedom of information </li></ul>
  • 3. Key elements of NZ Law <ul><li>Principle of availability </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No reason to ask, no justification necessary </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Withhold where disclosure would cause demonstrable harm </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Administrative reasons (will soon be published, would require substantial collation & research) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Conclusive reasons (security, defence, maintenance of the law) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Good reasons (privacy, commercial, policy formulation & decision making - subject to public interest override) </li></ul></ul>
  • 4. <ul><li>Time limits </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Respond - 20 working days </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Transfer – 10 working days </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Low cost </li></ul><ul><li>Ready access to free appeal </li></ul>
  • 5. <ul><li>Has changed the way government business is conducted - much more open/consultative </li></ul><ul><li>Has influenced other laws </li></ul><ul><li>Has affected the outcome of elections </li></ul><ul><li>Has lead to public servants being sacked </li></ul>
  • 6. Chile vs Nueva Zealandia <ul><li>Chile </li></ul><ul><li>Duty on requester to specify information </li></ul><ul><li>Third party veto </li></ul><ul><li>New Zealand </li></ul><ul><li>Duty on agency to assist </li></ul><ul><li>Can consult – but no veto & subject to public interest </li></ul>
  • 7. Chile vs Nueva Zealandia <ul><li>Chile </li></ul><ul><li>Secret for 25 years </li></ul><ul><li>Transparency Tribunal </li></ul><ul><li>Free provision </li></ul><ul><li>Real sanctions on officials for improper withholding </li></ul><ul><li>NZ </li></ul><ul><li>Constant revision </li></ul><ul><li>Ombudsman </li></ul><ul><li>Reasonable cost </li></ul><ul><li>Not punitive </li></ul>
  • 8. Things we’ve learnt <ul><li>Biggest barrier to access is knowing what to ask for </li></ul><ul><li>Training and resourcing is critical </li></ul><ul><li>A disproportionate burden can be imposed by a few requesters </li></ul><ul><li>Officials can be innovative in finding ways to avoid law </li></ul>

×