A Case for Restricted Access
(2003) Journal of Information Ethics — Vol. 12, n° 1, p. 56-66 (2003)
Files
DOCH096_Gosseries_.pdf
Open Access - Adobe PDF
- 43.18 KB
Details
- Authors
- Abstract
- Many Freedom of Information (FoI) regimes share two features. People requesting access to documents detained by a public authority are generally not required to demonstrate an interest. And once the document is made available to one applicant, it becomes virtually available to the whole world. Both features may appear to further the goal of openness. This is not necessarily so, as we shall see. Admittedly, most of us find it desirable to have both equality in access to State-detained documents and access to an increased amount of such documents. Still, we shall see that both requirements may conflict, which generates a dilemma for democratic theory. Depending on whether we grant more importance to "equality in access" or to "access to an increased amount", we shall either stick to the two FoI features identified above or defend an alternative FoI design. It is the latter option that will be taken in this paper. Before proceeding, one point of terminology. We shall use a distinction between "standing" and "merit". "Standing", broadly taken, has to do with whether a person is entitled to have her request or case examined on its substance by a State agency or heard by a court. Typical standing requirements include legal personality and interest. It is only once standing has been granted that the authority or court will begin to examine whether a claim is well-founded on its substance, hence to address the question of its merits.
- Affiliations
Citations
Gosseries, A. (2003). A Case for Restricted Access. Journal of Information Ethics, 12(1), 56-66. https://hdl.handle.net/2078.5/97770 (Original work published 2003)