The Information Commissioner, Mr Kevin Murphy, has promised to pursue civil servants who do not apply the spirit of the Freedom of Information Act. He has also said that pressure must be kept up until the Government includes the Garda Siochana within the scope of the Act.
Mr Murphy has wide powers under the Freedom of Information Act. He can review refusals to provide information and his decisions are binding. He is the final arbiter of what information should be made public.
He has not received a request to review a decision yet - the legislation came into force only on April 21st - but is expecting his first any day now.
Mr Murphy, who is also the Ombudsman, says he is determined to transform the culture of secrecy to one of openness. He will target those who do not operate within the spirit of the Act. The bias within the legislation is to release information. "My role is to release information unless the civil servants or others who hold information can convince me otherwise, and I am difficult to convince", he warned.
Giving his first interview since taking over the extra responsibility of Information Commissioner, Mr Murphy said that he would not tolerate receiving a large number of cases through government departments continually refusing to supply information. He would be critical if information was not divulged within the time limits. Where information was not released within a specified time, this would be counted as a refusal. He could then be asked to review a case. "I do not want to have unnecessary appeals", he added.
Over time, Mr Murphy will create precedents. His decisions will be published and will build up like case law. He is also expected to facilitate settlements where there are disputes about what information can or cannot be released.
He feels that there is much information which should be placed in the public domain as a matter of course, outside the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act. Too much information was secret without any reason for this, he said.
Mr Murphy maintains that the Irish culture of secrecy is already changing. He believes that this is due to the effects of the training received by civil servants working in the freedom of information area, who were looking for ways to give out information. This contrasted with local authorities, which were reluctant to give out anything under the regulations on access to environmental information.
"I hope working with the Act will allay any fears within the Civil Service. Other jurisdictions have incorporated freedom of information. I cannot see why it cannot be done here", he said.
The Act has been phased in for government departments since April and health boards and local authorities will become bound by it from October 21st.
Mr Murphy would not like things to stop when the health boards and local authorities come within the scope of the Act. Other bodies, including the Garda Siochana, could be brought in by ministerial order. The inclusion of the Garda within the scope of the legislation would show how serious we were about freedom of information, he said.
Legislation in New Zealand and Australia had provided the models for the Irish Act. In both of those countries the main users of the legislation were people seeking their own personal information.
Ireland, he believed, would create its own unique experience. He expected the Act to be used widely by politicians and political parties, reflecting the strong tradition of asking parliamentary questions.
There is provision in the Act to extend the period over which files can be made available. At present, access can be granted only to personal and official files created since the Act came into force in April. As far as Mr Murphy is concerned, extending the time period and increasing the number of bodies which come within the scope of the Act, including the Garda, remains on the agenda.
He wants to see voluntary hospitals and schools come within the scope of the Act. He cited an anomaly whereby a patient could be admitted to Cork Regional Hospital, and have access to their files, but then move to the Mater Hospital in Dublin and not have the same rights. A similar situation pertained with schools.
Mr Murphy emphasises that accountability is the key. If hospitals or schools received public money, they should be open to public scrutiny.