Venkatesh -- No, it's not true. For example, Canadian policy is posted on the website of the Treasury Board Secretariat. See:
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=12333§ion=text or http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=12323 or http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/gospubs/tb_j2/spmh-PR-eng.asp?printable=Tr ue although I suspect that last link is out of date. One caveat would be that security of information policies relating to defence alliances (NATO, or bilateral arrangements such as the India-US security of information agreement) are generally much harder to obtain. Another caveat: international comparisons don't always work the way one expects. In my recent Tribunal case in the UK, I showed some information that had been released in Canada, with the aim of showing that UK departments' fears about the consequences of disclosure were exaggerated. The Tribunal then used the Canadian example in exactly the opposite way, as an illustration of the information which they believed could not be released without prospect of harm. On its face this makes no sense, unless you believe -- as I suspect they did -- that Canada is an innocuous case that does not face threats of the sort faced by the UK (or India). This is also rubbish, but one can see how decisionmakers might come to believe that no other country faces conditions as difficult as their own. Best wishes, Alasdair -- Alasdair Roberts Rappaport Professor of Law and Public Policy Suffolk University Law School 120 Tremont Street, 210C Boston, MA 02108-4977 Tel +1-617-599-9029 Skype alasdair.roberts Email alasdair.roberts at gmail.com Web http://www.aroberts.us On 12/9/09 1:51 AM, "Venkatesh Nayak" <venkatesh at humanrightsinitiative.org> wrote: > Dear friends, > I am litigating before India's Central Information Commission for the > disclosure of the Manual of Departmental Security Instructions which > contains the criteria and process for classifying documents 'secret', 'top > secret', 'confidential' and 'restricted'. This manual is commonly used > across the federal and provincial governments since 1965. But the manual > istelf is a confidential document and is not accessible in the public domain > despite a requirement of proactive disclosure of all manuals and > instructions used by a public authority. I have argued that rules, > procedures and executive instructions cannot be kept secret. The public > authority in charge of issuing such instructions is arguing that disclosure > will amount to revealing 'strategy' of the government to keep things secret > in the public interest. I have argued that rules and instructions ordinarily > do not constitute 'strategy' as they are commonly used across departments. > Strategy is unique to tackling a specific case or problem. The public > authority is also agruing that nowehere in the world are such instructions > made public. I do not think that is true. > I have the theoretical arguments in support of disclosure but I also need to > a few examples of international practice. I would be grateful if you could > send me the links to the English version of rules and procedures that govern > classification of documents in your countries. Please treat this as an > urgent request as I have only 6 days to file my rejoinder. > regards > Venkatesh > > > > >
