Transparency in the Modern State

See generally Lamble Stephen , ‘Freedom of information, a Finnish clergyman's gift to democracy’ (2002) 97 Freedom of Information Review 2.

The process which led to its enactment commenced with the establishment of an Interdepartmental Committee to report on any modifications the US FoI Act required for it be appropriate for Australia.

See Freedom of Information Act 1989 (ACT), Freedom of Information Act 1989 (NSW), Information Act 2002 (NT), Freedom of Information Act 1992 (Qld), Freedom of Information Act 1991 (SA), Freedom of Information Act 1991 (Tas), Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic).

Countries which have enacted FoI laws include Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, which enacted Freedom of Information laws in 1993, 1998, 1982 and 2000, respectively.

Open Government Report at [6.9].

Commonwealth Ombudsman, Needs to Know: Own motion investigation into the administration of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 in Commonwealth agencies (June 1999) (‘the Needs to Know report’).

See Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, Freedom of Information Act 1982 (1987); ALRC/ARC, Open Government: A Review of the Federal Freedom of Information Act 1982, ALRC Report No 77/ARC Report No 40 (1995) (‘the Open Government report’); Senate Legal And Constitutional Committee, Report of the Inquiry into the Freedom of Information Amendment (Open Government) Bill 2000 (Cth) (5 April 2001) (‘the Senate Committee report’).

See Commonwealth Attorney-General Annual Report for 2000/01 2–4. Also the Needs to Know report, above n 6, [3.23].

See, eg, Walker Paula , ‘The Western Australian FoI experience 1996–1998 – Any Lessons for Reform?’ (1999) 79 FoI Review 7; Waters N , Print Media Use of Freedom of Information Laws in Australia (1999).

See MacDonald J Jones C H , The Law of Freedom of Information (2003) [9.10].

Canadian Taskforce, Access to Information: Making it Work for Canada (2000) 9.

MacDonald Jones , above n 10, [9.08].

See Tapscott M Taylor N , ‘Few Journalists Use the Federal Freedom of Information Act: A Study by the Center for Media and Public Policy’, <http://www.heritage.org/Press/MediaCenter/FoIA.cfm> at 14 October 2003; McDonald Jones , above n 10 [9.09].

For an example of such a mechanism see the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic), s 12.

See the Open Government report, above n 7 [7.7]–[7.8].

See Robertson v Minister of Pensions (1949) 1 KB 227, Formosa v Secretary, Department of Social Security (1988) 81 ALR 687 and discussion in Allars M , Introduction to Australian Administrative Law (1990) [5.96]–[5.102].

See Commonwealth Attorney-General Annual Report for 2000/01, Table 7.

See the Open Government report, above n 7 [7.12]. See also the Senate Committee Report, above n 7 [3.120].

5 USC s 552(a)(6)(E)(v)(II).

See, eg, ALRC, Australia's Federal Record: A Review of the Archives Act 1983 at [3.48]. See also statistics concerning differences between the amount of fees notified and collected in Commonwealth Attorney-General Annual Report for 2000/01 [1.33]; and comments by the Commonwealth Ombudsman in Needs to Know report, above n 6 [4.12]–[4.14]

See Freedom of Information (Charges) Regulations (Cth), reg 2(2).

See, eg, News Corporation Ltd v National Companies and Securities Commission (1984) 52 ALR 277; Kavvadias v Commonwealth Ombudsman (1984) 52 ALR 728. See generally Bayne P Rubenstein K , ‘The Objects of the Freedom of Information (FoI) Acts and their Interpretation’ (1995) 2 Australian Journal of Administrative Law 114.

Official Information Act 1982 (NZ), s 5.

See Shergold v Tanner (2001) 179 ALR 150 which was upheld on appeal to the High Court in Shergold v Tanner (2002) 188 ALR 302.

See Esso Australia Resources v Commissioner of Taxation [1999] HCA 67.

See Open Government Report [10.25]–[10.26].

See further Paterson M , ‘Commercial in Confidence Claims, Freedom of Information and Government Accountability — A Critique of the ARC's Approach to the Problems Posed by Government Outsourcing’ in Creyke R McMillan J , (eds), Administrative Justice — the Core and the Fringe (2001) 243.

See Airo-Farulla G , ‘“Public” and “Private” in Australian Administrative Law’ (1992) 3 Public Law Review 186; Michle C , ‘Government by Contract: Who is Accountable?’ (1999) 15 Queensland University of Technology Law Journal 135.

Official Information Act 1982, s 2(5). See also the Irish Freedom of Information Act 1997, s 6(9).

See generally Roberts A , 'Structural Pluralism and the Right to Information (2001) 51 University of Toronto Law Journal 243.

Campbell M , ‘FoI Access to Electronic Records’ (1995) 59 FoI Review 70.

See Gibbs R Hazelwood J , ‘Electronic Records — Problem Solved?: The Victorian Electronic Records Strategy and the Future of Electronic Record Keeping in Victoria’ (2000) <www.prov.vic.gov.au>.

Needs to Know report [3.68].

The Senate Committee report [3.140]. See also Snell R , “Administrative Compliance — Evaluating the Effectiveness of Freedom of Information (2001) 93 FoI Review 26.

See Commonwealth Attorney-General Annual Report for 2000/01, Chapter 4.

See Wallace v Health Commission of Victoria (1985) VR 403 regarding the need for applicants to be able to fully understand the nature and significance of making an application for access.

See the Open Government report n 50 regarding criticisms of another similar requirement.

See the Open Government report, above n 7 [10.21].

The time limits for notification of receipt, notification of decision and the further extension applicable where consultation is required are reduced to 7 days, 21 days and 14 days, respectively: Freedom of Information (Open Government) Bill 2003, Schedule 1, cls 10-12.

See Open Government report, Appendix D.

For a useful discussion of the potential of computer-assisted reporting see Lamble S , ‘Computer-assisted reporting and FoI: A PhD research project’ (2001) 91 FoI Review 2.

For a useful overview see Tankersley M , ‘How the Electronic Freedom of Information Act Amendments of 1996 Update Public Access for the Information Age’ (1998) Administrative Law Review 421, 422–3 reproduced in Vaughn R C , Freedom of Information (2000) 59, 60–1.

ALRC, Australia's Federal Record: A Review of the Archives Act 1983, Report No 85 [3.48] n 155.