Malacañang flip-flops on Freedom of Info bill

The Freedom of Information bill may not be certified as urgent by President Benigno Aquino III after all, with Malacañang expressing concern that some provisions, as stated in the bills pending before the Lower House, may hinder or endanger government operations. Secretary Herminio Coloma, head of the Presidential Communications Operations Office, listed the Palace’s reservations in a four-page statement, which was sent to the House public information committee on November 9 but was released to media only on Wednesday. Coloma said he was worried that government operations might be paralyzed or put at risk by unreasonable or constant requests for information. “There is a need to balance the broader right advocated by the bills with ensuring that government operations will not be paralyzed by gratuitous requests for information," he said. He expressed concern about the provisions that granted access to information that government decision-makers or project managers are currently using, and also provisions on the frequency of access to such information. Government agencies are entrusted with specific functions, which include formulating policy and managing programs, where information access is vital, Coloma said. “The smooth exercise of these functions, where regularity of actions of public officers is presumed, may be put at risk if the government agencies are subjected to requests for information at every step of the way," he said. Second-guessing the decisions of our public officers will undermine their effectiveness, he added. Coloma posed the question: Should information currently used for decision-making or project management be made immediately available? Or should a reasonable lapse of time be required before the information is publicized? He cited similar considerations by the military in declassifying its documents. “The intention is not to hide information or to limit the frequency of access but only to ensure that government operations are not hampered," Coloma explained. He was also concerned with giving access to transcripts and minutes of official meetings, which may diminish candid and open discussions by public officers. He said off-the-cuff remarks or outbursts that are recorded when important topics are tackled may cause embarrassment to officials or institutions, even if that was not the intent of the request for information. “This is the reason why public or private institutions only provide official reports to outside parties, leaving out information that can only distract said outside parties," he said, adding, “This is a salient point that needs to be addressed by the proposed bills." Despite this, Coloma said Malacañang supports the passage of the FOI bill and agrees with the House committee that information has become a powerful tool for governance and public participation in formulating policy. “To the extent that public access to information would help mobilize public support or remove any obstacle to the successful implementation of government policies or transactions, passage of this law has become an imperative," he said. Magsaysay chides Aquino for flip-flop On the other hand, Zambales Rep. Ma. Milagros Magsaysay chided President Aquino for not certifying the FOI bill as urgent. “How soon had he forgotten that once upon a time he was calling on Malacañang to certify that bill as urgent. But now that he is in power, he refuses to do what he once urged others to," Magsaysay said in a text message. She said the President should walk his talk. “He can’t be loudly calling for its passage one moment and then give it the cold shoulder in the next. If he won’t certify the FOI bill as urgent, then it would appear that all his huffing-and-puffing for the said measure early this year was choreographed drama meant to reap publicity during the campaign period," she said. Deputy Speaker Lorenzo Tañada III, one of the authors of the FOI bills, earlier warned against too many exceptions in the measure which could obscure the spirit of the freedom of information. “There is danger. It could come to a point where getting information will be virtually useless because the things you want to know all fall within enumerated exceptions," Tañada said. He was referring to the restrictions stated in House Bill 59 of Davao City Rep. Karlo Nograles and House Bill 830 of Camiguin Rep. Pedro Romualdo. Section 18 of Nograles’ House Bill 59 states that FOI provisions would not apply to government transactions that happened before the FOI bill became law. Romualdo’s proposal, on the other hand, has been criticized by some FOI advocates as requiring too many conditions for giving access to information except if it concerns national sovereignty. “That is a very vague, overly broad provision because all the things that the government does, may it be on taxation or the exercise of police power, concern national sovereignty," said lawyer Nep Malaluan of the Right to Know, Right Now Network.—JV/HS, GMANews.TV