This chapter observes that the IGAIs in the MENA region countries examined in this report exercise constant vigilance over the right to information, promote access to information, write reports, provide opinions on laws and regulations assess the enactment of the right to access information, and share their experiences with foreign authorities that carry out equivalent missions.
Institutions Guaranteeing Access to Information
OECD and MENA Region
Report
Table of contents
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Chapter 8. The general missions of IGAIs
Abstract
As in OECD member countries, the legislation of the four MENA region countries examined (Jordan, Lebanon, Tunisia, and Morocco) makes IGAIs the guardians of the right to access information in its two essential dimensions: the right to public information as a way to promote democratic values and rights at the individual and collective level, and the right to private information, meaning information concerning a particular individual, in terms of the interest that this individual may express regarding access to his personal data held by public bodies or the private sector.
However, like all administrative authorities, IGAIs act within the limits of their jurisdiction and the rules dictated to them by law. They interpret and apply the law on access to information in its principles, exceptions, and penalties, both towards those individuals who are subject to the obligations established by law and the beneficiaries of this right.
8.1. IGAIs oversee the right to information
As for the IGAIs in OECD member countries, the IGAIs in the MENA region examined in this chapter are responsible for overseeing the right to information and for ruling daily on its application.
8.1.1. The concepts of information and of an individual obligated to communicate information
The legislation of the four MENA region countries examined in this report closely links the concepts of information and of an individual obligated to communicate information. This exclusively concerns the information held by those who either carry out a mission of public service, or who are closely tied to the public sphere, for example through the public funds that they receive. This combination gives a broad scope of application to the legislation.
Jordanian legislation defines information as any oral, written, copied, recorded, or electronically preserved data, as well as statistics, documents, or recordings preserved by any other means that are subject to the control or responsibility of a person at a ministry, government office, authority, entity, or any public institution, an official public institution, or a company responsible for managing a public service.
Articles 2 and 3 of the Tunisian organic law grant a very broad scope of application to the right to access information. This area covers all recorded information, regardless of the date, form, or medium, produced or obtained by bodies subject to the law’s provisions in performance of their work. The law specifically concerns: the Presidency of the Republic and its bodies, the Presidency of the Government and its bodies, the Assembly of the Representatives of the People, the Ministries and the various bodies that sit beneath them, domestically or abroad, the Central Bank, public enterprises and establishments and their offices abroad, local and regional public bodies, local authorities, judiciary bodies, the Superior Council of the Judiciary, the Constitutional Court, the State Audit Court, the constitutional authorities, independent public authorities, regulatory authorities, private law persons responsible for managing a public service, and organisations, associations, and bodies receiving public financing. It should be noted that the very broad scope of this law, which applies to the Parliament and to the judiciary, places it at a higher level than a number of laws in OECD member countries, one that is in accordance with international standards.
The Lebanese law defines the government as the state and its administration, public institutions, independent administrative entities, courts, entities and councils of a judiciary or arbitration nature, be they ordinary or extraordinary, including judicial, administrative, and financial courts (while entirely excluding religious courts), municipalities and syndicates of municipalities, private institutions and companies responsible for managing public facilities or assets, public-private enterprises, public interest foundations, all other public law entities, and entities exercising a regulatory power over certain sectors. The law adds that a government document means any written, electronic, or photographic document, any audio or video recording, as well as any mechanically legible document in any form held by the government. Government documents include, but are not limited to files, reports, studies, acts, statistics, orders, instructions, directives, circulars, warrants, letters, opinions, and decisions issued by the government, contracts entered into by the government, and documents belonging to the national archives.
Article 2 of the Moroccan law on access to information defines information as data and statistics expressed in the form of numbers, letters, drawings, images, audio-visual recordings, or in any other form that are contained in documents, reports, studies, decrees, circulars, publications, notes, or databases, or in any other document of a public nature produced or obtained by the relevant institutions or bodies in performance of their missions of public service, in any medium whatsoever, in electronic format or otherwise. This article also says that the persons and bodies to which this law applies includes: the Chamber of Representatives, the Chamber of Councillors, government administrations, courts, local political bodies, public establishments and all public law entities, institutions or bodies in the public or private sector responsible for carrying out a mission of public service, and governance institutions and bodies as stated in Title XII of the Constitution. These comprise the National Human Rights Council, the Ombudsman, the Council of the Moroccan Community Living Abroad, the Authority for Equality and for Fighting all Forms of Discrimination, the High Authority for Audio-Visual Communication, the Anti- Trust Council, the National Authority for Probity and for Preventing and Fighting against Corruption, the Superior Council of Education, Training, and Scientific Research, the Advisory Council on Family and Childhood, and the Advisory Council on Youth and Community Action.
8.1.2. The proactive publication of information
In OECD member countries, the great majority of the population does not make requests for the communication of information, but it comes to know it through its proactive publication by those entities subject to this obligation, the government in particular. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the persons subject to the law to place this information at the public’s disposal without being requested to do so. The most recent legislation in the MENA region countries examined tends to establish this same type of obligation. The Jordanian law on access to information, which dates back to 2007, does not require the proactive publication of information.
The Tunisian law devotes an entire chapter to the proactive publication of information. It contains a very detailed list of the disclosure obligations that apply to all bodies subject to the law. It should be noted that the law provides for the publication and updating of information. Article 7 of the law specifically provides that information must be published on the obligated entity’s website, and it establishes the frequency of the updating of the information, as the data on the websites in question are often old and incomplete. These positive measures will lead the obligated entities to act and to designate the persons responsible for updating the information. Article 8 of the Tunisian law also provides that the bodies subject to the provisions of this law must proactively publish any information that was the subject of at least two repeated requests, as long as it does not fall under the legal exceptions to publication. This latter measure is very interesting, as it allows users to avoid the multiplication of requests and the relevant offices from responding to additional requests.
Article 7 of the Lebanese law proclaims the obligation to publication in a much more generic manner. It provides this for transactions involving a payment of more than 5 million LBP (roughly 2,550 EUR1) to ensure a good level of transparency in the use of public funds. The information is published within a 15-day term; however, the law does not specify when this term begins. This obligation should appear when the act in question is completed or is mandatory in nature.
The Moroccan law specifies the procedures for the advance publication of information in detail. It provides for the general obligation using all available means, especially electronic ones (national data portals). It also specifies a long list of texts subject to the obligation to publication (legislative and regulatory texts, budgets for local political bodies, official reports, etc.). Article 11 specifies that any institution or body must adopt all useful measures to manage, update, classify, and archive the information in its possession to facilitate its presentation to people who request it.
8.1.3. The reuse of public information
In OECD member countries, the legislation may provide for the reuse of public information for purposes other than the ones for which it is held or for which it was developed. Reuse entails a component of administrative transparency, and a financial one, which consists of commercially developing the data assets in the government’s possession (Martinez et al, 2007). The approach adopted in the four MENA region countries reveals several disparities.
Neither the Jordanian nor the Tunisian law contain explicit provisions on the right to reuse information, nor do they explicitly prohibit it. According to the data collected in preparation of this report, the Tunisian government hopes to produce a draft law on the reuse of information. The intention of filling this legislative gap as quickly as possible merits support, and the Tunisian government can take inspiration from the laws of OECD member countries. The Jordanian government could follow suit and develop a similar project.
Article 20 of the Lebanese law provides that the right to access information does not allow beneficiaries or any other party to transfer, publish, or use the documents for commercial purposes, unless these documents have been innovatively reorganised in accordance with Article 3 of Law No. 75 of 3 April 1999 on the protection of literary and artistic property, and on the condition that the documents do not contain any personal information and that they respect intellectual property rights. Article 20 thus protects the intellectual property of works while allowing for the reuse of information, especially when its purpose is a new creation. Nevertheless, the preparation of a draft law on the reuse of information remains necessary.
According to Article 6 of the Moroccan law, the use and reuse of information that has been published, made available to the public, or delivered by institutions and bodies subject to the law are authorised on the condition that they are made for legal purposes and that their content is not altered, that the source and issuance date are mentioned, and that this does not compromise the general interest or the rights of third parties. Thus, the information contained in these documents to which third parties hold intellectual property rights is not subject to the right of reuse.
Article 6 of the Moroccan law does not say anything about those cases where the entity demands compensation because of its intellectual property rights. In some OECD member countries, like France, entities obligated to communicate information are authorised to charge fees on the condition that they first enter into a reuse license agreement. In the French case, ignorance of the license’s clauses and altering the public information are subject to penalties (fines) inflicted by the French Commission on Access to Government Documents in response to a complaint filed by the government. Such an example could serve as inspiration to the authorities of MENA region countries as they envision the evolution of their legislation in this direction.
8.1.4. The limits to the right to access information
In OECD member countries, IGAIs play an important role in setting limits on the right to access information. They face a dual constraint in their application of the law: ensuring a balance between the right to access information and the right to privacy on the one side and the right to protect the confidentiality of the information whose disclosure would harm the public interest on the other (OECD, 2002).
In OECD member countries, it is a given that legislation must formulate exceptions to the right to access information clearly and specifically. These exceptions are made using strict criteria that consider both the public and private harm that could arise from communicating the information and the nature of the public interest protected by this communication. In some laws, communication of the information is the rule; this limits the profusion of exceptions. The justification of the refusal to communicate the information depends on the public authority’s capacity to prove that the information in question is subject to an objective provided by law, that the communication of the information would significantly hinder this objective, and that this hindrance would be considerably greater than the interest in communicating the information to the public. This principle applies to all the branches (executive, legislative, and judiciary) and all government departments (especially those involving national security and defence). Additionally, bodies with a majority of attributions that fall under the regime of exceptions should nevertheless not be completely excluded from the law’s scope of application. Each decision leading to a refusal to communicate information must thus be duly justified, especially when it concerns individual requests for access2.
The regime of exceptions provided in the laws of the four MENA region countries in question is at times complex and particular to the history of each country, or to its current political, social, and international situation. For example, some exceptions are tied to the need to protect individual freedom in traditionally authoritarian states, or the need to protect public resources from corruption.
The general exceptions
The laws of the four MENA region countries examined have exceptions of a general nature. Thus, Jordanian Law No. 47/2007 on the protection of the right to access information provides for a large number of exceptions, which demands a very careful interpretation of its provisions3. Some of the general exceptions to the right to
communicate information involve the identity of the person requesting. For example, the Jordanian law provides that this be a Jordanian citizen (Art. 7). The Moroccan law on the right to access to information reserves this right to citizens of the country and foreigners who are legal residents. These limitations diverge from the practices in OECD member countries, where requests for access are made without any consideration of nationality or residence. According to the data collected for this report, the Jordanian government, aware of the overly restrictive nature of certain limitations imposed by the country’s law, hopes to initiate a legislative reform to remove them.
Without entering into the details, we may observe that the Jordanian law lists a large number of exceptions to the right to access information, which demands a very careful interpretation of the law. Furthermore, even though the first paragraph of Article 24 of the Tunisian organic law establishes a principle that limits the exceptions (“The body in question may only refuse access to information when this compromises national defence or security, international relations, or a third party’s rights involving the protection of their privacy, personal data, or intellectual property”.), the following paragraphs provide specifications to indicate that the limits are relative and can be interpreted otherwise. Thus, the domains cited in the first paragraph of Article 24 of the organic law are not considered as absolute exceptions to the right to access information. They are subject to a harm test requiring that the harm be serious, whether it is concomitant or after the fact. They are also subject to a test of the public interest in the information’s accessibility or inaccessibility for each request. The proportionality between the interests to be protected and the reason for the request for access are thereby considered. (See Box No.8.2 below on the absolute and relative exemptions to the right to access information).
Article 25 of the law on access to information expressly protects the identity of individuals who report abuse or acts of corruption. Article 26 provides for an absolute right to obtain information tied to grave violations of human rights or war crimes and the pursuit of their perpetrators and to the protection of the public interest from a grave threat to health, security, the environment, or resulting from a crime.
Article 19 of the Lebanese law gives much greater latitude to the obligated entities in refusing access to information by stating that “refusal decisions are written and reasonable”. The only explicit exception concerns the prohibition of publishing salaries and indemnities (Art. 7).
Article 7 of the Moroccan law lists a very large number of exceptions to the right to access information. It provides that: “[…] any information is excluded from the right to access information when it is tied to national defence, the state’s domestic and international security, as well as information involving the privacy of individuals or types of personal data or information whose disclosure is likely to infringe on the fundamental freedoms and rights specified in the Constitution, and the protection of sources of information.
The provisions of the previous paragraph apply to information whose disclosure may cause harm to:
1. Relations with another state or international governmental organisation;
2. The state’s monetary, economic, or financial policies;
3. Industrial property rights, copyright, and other such rights; and
4. The rights and interests of victims, experts, and whistle-blowers with regard to crimes such as corruption, embezzlement, and the abuse of power.
Information considered confidential by current legislation in effect is excluded from the right to access information, as is information whose disclosure may cause harm to:
a. the confidential nature of resolutions issued by the Council of Ministers and the Council of the Government;
b. the confidential nature of administrative inquiries and investigations, unless authorised by the relevant administrative authorities;
c. the progress of court proceedings and all other related procedures, unless authorised by the relevant administrative authorities; and
d. the principles of free, fair, and open competition, as well as private initiative”.
Article 28 of the Tunisian law and Article 21 of the Lebanese law proclaim that documents that are exempt from the right to information must become accessible according to the procedures and timeframes established in the legislation on archives. Finally, the laws on access to information in Tunisia (Article 27), Jordan (Article 11) and Morocco (Article 8) authorise the partial communication of information after the names of the parties protected by confidentiality have been redacted.
Box 8.1. A particular case in the legislation: the right to access court documents
A growing number of countries grant access to court documents by third parties. The judiciary branch is not systematically excluded from provisions on the public’s right to access documents.
National systems for the accessibility of court documents are mostly partial (i.e., they only apply to certain types of courts or documents); however, there is a marked tendency to subject the judiciary branch to the requirement of transparency.
Some countries (mainly Canada, Finland, and Slovenia) have a comprehensive system for accessing court documents. Although a meticulous examination of these systems has highlighted significant differences between them, they all in principle grant the public the broadest access to court documents.
Source: Determined by the author on the basis of: European Parliament (2013), national practices with regard to the accessibility of court documents, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2013/474406/IPOL- JURI_ET(2013)474406_EN.pdf.
Box 8.2. Relative and absolute exemptions from the right to access information in European Union countries
The legislation of European Union member countries contains exemptions from the right to access information. “Their purpose is to limit administrative discretion by ranking interests at stake (establishing a hierarchy) so that public authorities are required to assess the concrete relevance of those interests. The most commonly used legal standards in this relation are the harm test (absolute exemptions) and the balancing test (relative exemptions)”.
Absolute exceptions: the harm test
“The harm test involves an assessment. Firstly, the public authority has to establish the nature of the impairment that might result from disclosure. Secondly, the likelihood of the detriment to occur has to be convincingly established. Regarding the nature of the harm to the public interest, it is necessary to identify and qualify the specific detriment that would endanger the interest protected by the exemption. A distinction can be drawn between the potential and the actual risk of damage. The best judicial and administrative practices tend to reject the former notion and to converge on the latter: in order to apply an exemption, the risk of impairment should be more than an abstract possibility. If exceptions to the rule of access have to be interpreted restrictively, a request can only be rejected if disclosure is capable of actually and specifically undermining the protected interest.
Regarding the likelihood of the detriment, a public authority needs to show that there is a causal relationship between the potential disclosure and the impairment of the public interest. Once it is ascertained that the risk of impairment is actual and specific, the degree of the risk for it to occur should be assessed. Two options are available. One is based on the distinction between plausible and likely impairment: a requirement of a plausible harm is more stringent than the requirement of a harm that is merely likely. Another variant of this technique involves the distinction between the straight and reverse harm test: a straight requirement of damage favours the granting of access whereas a reverse requirement of damage assumes secrecy to be the main rule.”
Relative exemptions: the balancing test
“The possibility that the public interest in transparency could override a public or private interest protected by the exemption implies that the conflicting interests are put on an equal foot. There is no presumption in favour of protecting one of the two at legislative level. It is for the public authority to weigh the two competing interests and the latter is entrusted with full discretion. A proper application of the balancing test requires a preliminary harm test. If the harm is not relevant (or not likely to occur), there is no need for balancing: the public interest in disclosure would prevail without being “weighed”. The second step, specific to the balancing test, involves weighing the potential damage against the corresponding benefits arising from the disclosure. The relevant criteria for balancing are the general ones pertaining to the exercise of administrative discretion and, thus, may vary from one legal tradition to the other. Nonetheless, since the right of access is recognised as a fundamental right it imposes the adoption of strict scrutiny over the discretionary power of public authorities. Therefore such scrutiny should be carried out in light of the principle of proportionality.”
Source: European Parliament (2013), national practices with regard to the accessibility of court documents, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2013/474406/IPOL- JURI_ET(2013)474406_EN.pdf.
Exceptions concerning the protection of privacy
As indicated beforehand, the Tunisian law and the Moroccan law assert the general principle of the protection of privacy in relation to the information to be communicated. This principle is of great importance in practice, because it applies to a large amount of personal data held by the government and by public agents (for example, medical, tax, asset, and family-related data).
Article 9 of the Moroccan law adds a provision on the protection of information that third parties have filed with an institution or body to maintain its confidentiality, but which may be subject to a request for communication. When receiving such a request and before delivering the requested information, the institution or body must obtain the agreement of this third party to the disclosure of the requested information. If the response is negative, the institution or body in question will decide whether to disclose the information in light of the grounds put forth by this third party.
Paragraphs e and f of Article 13 of the Jordanian law are much more explicit. They provide for the protection of personal data and individuals’ education and medical files, professional files, as well as information on bank accounts, money transfers and professional secrets. They also protect the confidentiality of correspondence.
Article 4 of the Lebanese law regulates in detail the access to government documents containing personal data. It prohibits the communication of information regarding privacy and health (Art. 5-4). Moreover, only the person in question has the right to access personal files or any evaluation report for an individual when the following information appears in such documents: the person’s name, identification number or code, or any other identifying description such as fingerprints or eye scans, or acoustic or photographic records.
8.1.5. Penalties
Penalties may apply in case of an infringement on the right to information or for an undue disclosure of information. Under the Tunisian and Moroccan laws, the right to access information is protected by specific disciplinary and criminal measures. The IGAIs do not intervene in their adoption, however.
The Jordanian and Lebanese laws on access to information do not specify penalties for infringements on the right to access information, without prejudice to the applicability of penalties arising under the general criminal law or public administrative law systems. The Tunisian organic law inflicts a fine for an intentional infringement on the right to access information within bodies subject to the law on access to information (Art. 57). It also provides for disciplinary measures to be taken against public agents who ignore the provisions of this law (Art. 58). The Moroccan law sets forth disciplinary penalties for anyone responsible for information within entities subject to the provisions of the law who does not observe them. The law also inflicts the criminal penalty of disclosing professional secrets on anyone who breaches the prohibitions from disclosure set forth in its Article 7. According to the Tunisian law (Art. 58) and the Moroccan law (Art. 29), the illegal and intentional damaging of information or the incitation to do so is punishable by imprisonment or fines.
8.1.6. The general missions fulfilled by IGAIs
The IGAIs of MENA region countries, like those of OECD member countries, receive very important general attributions for guaranteeing access to information; however, they may not issue regulatory acts that have a general, prerogative effect. This power remains with the executive branch.
8.1.7. Promoting access to information
Paragraph 4 of Article 4 of the Jordanian law provides, with regard to the Information Council, that “the Council publishes bulletins and carries out all appropriate activities to explain and reinforce the right to knowledge and a culture of information”. In this context, the Information Council has prepared a certain number of circulars and directives to organise the classification, availability, and statistical monitoring of information by the various responsible offices. Such an approach is indispensable to a coherent and effective exercise of the right to access information4, and, in observance of the jurisdiction held by IGAIs in the region, it might inspire their actions.
The Tunisian law provides that the IGAI monitors the policy in favour of the proactive dissemination of information by the relevant bodies. This applies to information subject to the obligation to publication, updating, the periodic placement at the public’s disposal, publication and updating on websites, and which has been the subject of at least two requests for access. The IGAI also promotes a culture of access to information in coordination with the bodies subject to the law’s provisions and civil society through initiatives to educate and raise awareness among the general public (Art. 38).
The Lebanese National Anticorruption Commission advises the relevant authorities on all cases involving the application of provisions of the law on access to information. It also participates in educating citizens and raising awareness among them of the importance of the right to access information and on exercising this right. It helps train government personnel and managers on how individuals are authorised to access information and on the importance of this access (Article 22).
Under the Moroccan law, the Moroccan Commission on Access to Information is responsible for raising awareness among the relevant individuals about the importance of transmitting information and facilitating access to information through all available means, especially by organising training sessions for managers of the relevant institutions and bodies (Article 22).
8.1.8. Writing and presenting reports
The laws of the four MENA region countries examined in this report demand that IGAIs write an annual report on their work, in which they make their observations and recommendations.
According to the Jordanian law, the Information Council approves the annual report on the exercise of the right to access information written by the Information Commissioner and presents it to the Prime Minister5. The Tunisian Authority for Access to Information prepares an annual report on its work that contains suggestions and recommendations necessary for the consecration of the right to access information, as well as statistical data on the number of requests for access to information and appeals, the responses and their timeframes, the decisions adopted by the Authority, and the annual oversight of their implementation by the bodies subject to the law’s provisions. The Authority submits its annual report to the President of the Republic, the President of the Assembly of the Representatives of the People, and to the Head of Government, and this report is published on the Authority’s website (Art. 38).
According to Article 22 of the Lebanese law, the National Anti-Corruption Commission prepares an annual report on its work on the right to access information, which also assesses the enactment of this right. This document also reports on the difficulties encountered by individuals in accessing information and classifies them by category. The Commission also publishes special reports on important topics.
According to the Moroccan law, the Commission on Access to Information prepares an annual report on its work in the domain of the right to access information, which specifically includes an assessment of the implementation of the actions carried out (Art. 22).
8.1.9. Providing opinions on laws and regulations
The Tunisian law provides that the IGAI must issue its opinion on draft laws and regulations concerning access to information (Art. 38). Under the Moroccan law, the IGAI provides opinions on draft legislation and regulations that the government presents to it (Art. 22). These measures are important for the overall coherence of the legislation and the primacy accorded to the right to access information.
8.1.10. Assessing the consecration of the right to access information
According to Article 38 of the Tunisian law on access to information, the Authority for Access to Information periodically assesses the consecration of the right to access information by the bodies subject to the provisions of this law. Article 22 of the Moroccan law requires the Commission on Access to Information to formulate recommendations and proposals with the aim of improving the quality of the procedures for accessing information, and to submit proposals to the government to bring current legal and regulatory texts closer to the principle of access to information.
8.1.11. Sharing experiences with foreign counterparts
Under Article 38 of the Tunisian law, the Authority for Access to Information shares its experiences and best practices with its foreign counterparts and specialised international organisations, and it enters into cooperation agreements in this domain. These attributions comply with the need to share experiences at the international level and with the increasingly important role played by international conventions and organisations. It should, however, be noted that the conventional capacity accorded at the international level to the Tunisian Authority for Access to Information limits the traditional role of the government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in defining the country’s international policies. It also represents the exception among the laws of the MENA region countries examined in this report.
References
European Parliament (2013), National practices with regard to the accessibility of court documents, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2013/474406/IPOL- JURI_ET(2013)474406_EN.pdf.
Martinez, R. and B. Marx (2007), La longue marche de l'information publique, de la liberté d'accès aux documents administratifs à la réutilisation commerciale des informations publiques [“The long march of public information, freedom of access to government documents, and the commercial reuse of public information”], Documentaliste-Sciences de l'Information, 2007/3 (Vol. 44), pgs. 218-227.
Mendel, T. (2016), “Analysis of Law No. 47 for the Year 2007, Guaranteeing the Right to Obtain Information”, pgs. 12-17, UNESCO, Amman, http://stmjo.com/en/wp- content/uploads/2016/06/UpdatedJordan.RTI-Analysis.16-05-18LS.pdf
OECD (2002), Citizens as Partners, OECD Handbook on Information, Consultation and Public Participation in Policy-Making, OECD Publishing, Paris
Notes
← 1. As of 7 November 2017.
← 2. Article 19 (no date), “The public’s right to information: principles regarding the legislation on
the freedom of information”, http://www.ipu.org/splz-f/sfe/foi_ps.pdf.
← 3. Article 13 of Law No. 47/2007 on the protection of the right to access information establishes a large number of exceptions to the right to access information. It states “Without prejudice to the provisions of the applicable legislation, the person responsible for access to information will refrain from disclosing information on: a. Secrets and documents protected by another law. b. Documents classified as confidential and protected, and documents that can be communicated upon another country’s agreement. c. Secrets involving national defence, state security, or foreign policy. d. Information including the analysis, recommendations, propositions, or consultations to be submitted to the responsible official before a decision is made on them. This includes correspondence or information exchanged between the various government offices. e. Personal data and dossiers for education or medical personnel, professional dossiers, bank accounts, transfers, and professional confessions. f. Personal or confidential correspondence, whether sent by post, cable, telephone, or any other technological means, with government offices and the responses to this correspondence. g. Information whose disclosure would affect negotiations between the Kingdom and any other state or authority. h. Investigations led by the public ministry, the judicial system, or security authorities into any crime or proceeding falling within their jurisdiction, as well as investigations by the relevant authorities conducted with the aim of revealing financial, customs, or bank-related offences, unless the relevant authority authorizes their disclosure. i. Commercial, industrial, or technological information, information on scientific, research, or technology transfer offers, whose disclosure would lead to an infringement of copyright, intellectual property rights, or fair and lawful competition practices, or to an irregular profit or loss for anyone”. For a detailed study of these exceptions, see: Mendel, T. (2016), “Analysis of Law No. 47 for the Year 2007, Guaranteeing the Right to Obtain Information”, pgs. 12-17, UNESCO, Amman, http://stmjo.com/en/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/UpdatedJordan.RTI- Analysis.16-05-18LS.pdf
← 4. Circular No. (17) for the year 2007 of 17/11/2007 on the need to index and organise information and documents at this disposal of government administrations and institutions; Circular No. (19) for the year 2007 of 29/7/2007 and Communication No. (20) for the year 2007 of 5/8/2007 on the establishment of forms for requesting information and on the consolidation of information contained in this document; Circular No. (24) for the year 2007 of 19/11/2007 to extend the necessary period for completing the indexing and organising of information for an additional period of three months ending on 17/12/2007; Circular No. (29) for the year 2007 of 14/11/2007, which includes the adoption of request for information prepared by the Information Council; Circular No. (13) for the year 2008, which upholds the need to implement the indexing and classification of information in all ministries and public institutions; Circular No. (19) for the year 2012 of 27/11/2012 on the presentation of statistics to the Council on requests made to access information sent to government ministries and offices, as well as to public institutions and bodies pursuant to Article 9(a) of the law on the right to access information; Approval of price lists for expenses incurred by the Ministry for photocopies or copies of requested information. Source: Mutawe, E., La situation du droit d’accès à l’information en Jordanie [“The state of the right to access information in Jordan”], contribution to the OECD regional workshop on access to information, Caserta, 18 December 2017.
← 5. Article 4, paragraphe 4, e.