‘Sunshine laws’ shed light on government

Press, 31 May 1977, Page 20

‘Sunshine laws’ shed light on government

By

JOHN WILSON

of the editorial staff of “The Press"

"Freedom of information” — the right of members of the public to know how public bodies reach' decisions and what the files of governmental departments contain — is likely to become

an important political issue in New Zealand.

Sir Guy Powles has called on the Government to stop its apparent stalling on the much-needed review of the Official Secrets Act; the Friends of the Clutha have complained that the act has been used to prevent public access to information about hydro proposals.

Other environmental groups have charged the Fo-est Service with not making information fairly available about proposals for the use of native forests, especially on the West. Coast. .. freedom of information campaign, which began in Auckland, is gaining momentum. according to its organisers. A private member’s bill on freedom of information may surface in Parliament this year, sponsored by Mr M. J. Minogue (National, Hamilton West). In th* United States, freedom of information has been a lively issue. Vietnam and Watergate, especially, promoted the notion that secrecy at all levels of Government is had. Concerted efforts have been made to open the meetings of local

bodies to the public and to prise documents and files from Federal departments and bureaux. The first Federal Freedom of Information Act passed before the events of the late 1960 s and early 1970 s made the question a popular issue. The 1966 law guaranteed citizens access to Government files, except those which contain genuine security secrets, medical records, corporate trade secrets, and some other exempted material. The procedures laid down in this act were lengthy and costly. In 1975 amendments to the law were enacted (over President Ford’s veto) to make the process of securing a file from a Government department swifter and easier. The burden was placed on the department to justify keeping secret the material sought, rather than on the citizen seeking the information to demonstrate that he or she had a need for it.

The "need to know” standard of the old law was supplanted by the “right to know” spirit of the amended law. The new law also provided for appeals to Federal courts for access to documents which departments were withholding.

In the two years since the Freedom of Information Act was amended, citizens, reporters, lawyers and even criminals

have all had access to Government “secrets.” In 1975, 89,000 people asked for, and most obtained, files from just three Government departments — Defence, Justice and the Treasury. In 1976. the Justice Department alone received 51,000 requests for information. Some departments dug their toes in and attempted to resist the law. The Bureau of Prisons claimed at first that inmates were “civally dead” and therefore not entitled to seek documents under the act, and only abandoned the claim under pressure.

Departments have attempted to charge for information supplied and so choke off requests for large numbers of documents. The F. 8.1. required Dr Daniel Ellsberg to pay 10 cents a page for documents which were said to be about him. For his $2BO, Dr Ellsberg received 2800 pages of clippings.

The process of securing a documents or file is supposed not to take more than 40 days, but the F. 8.1. has been known to stall requests for up to 21 months. The bureau has claimed that its files are so sensitive and complicated that compliance with the statutory time limit is impossible.

But other departments have been swift and ready to meet requests for files. The Pentagon, surprisingly, has proved one of the most

compliant of all departments, earning praise even from an American Council for Civil Liberties lawyer. The other front on which progress has been made by those in the United States who have sought to make their Government more open has been the passing of “sunshine” laws in the various states.

“Sunshine” laws are laws which open the meetings of public bodies to members of the public and the press. New Zealand has an approximate equivalent of a “sunshine” law in its (recently amended) Public Bodies Meetings Act. When New York’s Open Meetings Law came into effect in January this year all 50 states then had “sunshine” laws. The laws vary from state to state. Generally, meetings of public bodies can still be closed if lawsuits, personal matters, public safety and labour relations are under discussion, but must otherwise be open. In Kansas, public bodies can close their meetings by a simple majority vote. At the other extreme, in Florida, members of a public body may not discuss public business if they happen to meet on a golf course. The laws in New Jersey and Connecticut require public bodies to give public notice of their meetings and agendas and to discuss matters openly before they take a vote. Still before the courts in New York state are cases concerning the right of bodies such as a

the plot was discovered. Meheishi was given political asylum in Cairo and has since been the target of a kidnap attempt and at least .one assassination bid by Libyan agents, discovered by Mr Sadat’s intelligence service before they could move in for the kill.

The movement against Gadaffi inside Libya is reported to be serious enough to have led to the execution of about 35 Libyans recently, mainly army officers, after secret trials by military tribunals. These were the first executions in Libya in about 23 years. One report

county board of supervisors (the equivalent of a county council) or a school board to close “planning sessions” — meetings not formally convened for official business -- to the public. The body which oversees the execution of the Open Meetings Law in New York, the Committee on Public Access, has almost no powers of enforcement and its interpretations of the law are often ignored. In Connecticut, however, the Freedom of Information Commission has power to order a public body’ to open its meetings and the power to nullify the proceedings of any public body which violates the law. Fines of up to $5OO can be imposed for violations.

Campaigners in the United States for more open government started out ahead of their counterparts in New Zealand because there is no American act like New Zealand’s Official Secrets Act which imposes criminal penalties for the disclosure of information by public servants — the “leaks” which are now almost an established part of American political lite.

A minor countercurrent in the trend towards more open government in the United States was set up recently by the Director of the C. I. A., Admiral Stansfield Turner, who told reporters and others recently that he was “amenable to a statute to impose a criminal penalty on leakers."

last month by the Egyptian Middle East News Agency put the number of executed as high as 50, including 45 army’ officers, but some exaggeration on the part of the Egyptian agency is possible. The Egyptians appear to be well enough informed of political discontent against Gadaffi inside Libya, and -of the activities of the underground Libyan National Rally, working to bring him down. What is unclear is how much assistance the L.N.R. receives from Mr Sadat. Perhaps the more interesting chapters of the LibyanEgyptian confrontation are just beginning. Meanwhile, of concern to N.A.T.O. are not so much the huge arms purchases Gadaffi has made from Moscow, but the air and naval base facilities he has provided for the Soviet Union in Libya.

This has long been an object of the CIA. But President Carter promptly declared that his Administration as a whole wanted to minimise the use of criminal penalties for disclosing information. The “New York Times” columnist, Tom Wicker, pointeo out that if it oassed such a law, Congress would be impeding its own ability to get information from Government departments and bureaux which it might need to frame its own legislative programme. Mr Wicker also challenged the supporters of such a law to show what recent leak had done any real, demonstrable damage to national security. As the Federal Freedom of Information Act and the state “sunshine” laws take effect, the United States appears to be learning that government can indeed be. more open and keep less secret from the public without prejudicing national security and without the efficiency of government being seriously impaired. The Official Secrets Act. the Public Bodies Meetings Act and perhaps, the office of the Ombudsman make the situation in New Zealand different from the outset, but there is still enough secrecy and a large enough number of “closed door” public bodies in New Zealand to make the American experience with the Freedom of Information Acts and the state "sunshine” laws worth watching.

The extent of the military facilities the Russians have acquired began to emerge after a secret visit Gadaffi made to Moscow in December. Little is known about what was discussed, or even how long the visit lasted, but Gadaffi took with him the Libyan army commander-in-chief (Colonel Jaber Younis), one of the five remaining members of the original Tripoli junta.

In February’ highly sophisticated Soviet intelligence Tu-22 aircraft, thinly disguised with Libyan markings, began taking off from a base on Libyan soil for reconnaissance’ flights .over the east Mediterranean. Naval facilities the Russians have received in Libyan Mediterranean ports now effectively make up for those lost in Alexandria when Mr Sadat ordered them out of Egypt.