Instituto Federal de Acceso a la Información Pública Washington, D.C. Juan Pablo Guerrero Amparán February 2005

Contents • FOIA in Mexico • Federal Institute for Access to Public Information (IFAI) • Mandatory Public Information on Internet • Requests (Year 2004) • Petitioners profile • More popular Government agencies • Appeals to IFAI (2003 & 2004) • Success stories • Resistance • Potential Impacts

Transparency and Access to Government Information Act (FOIA) • Civil Society Participation (Oaxaca group) • Three initiatives (PRD, Executive, Oaxaca Group) • Unanimous Congressional approval (April, 2002; law in June 2003) • Regulates two civil rights: freedom of information & privacy rights

FOIA Objectives • • • • • •

Easy & quick access Transparency in Public Affairs Enforcement of Privacy Rights Enhance Accountability Set rules for Archives Foster Democracy & the Rule of Law

FOIA: Main characteristics • • • • • • •

Government information on Internet Regulates classification of information Access to & protection of personal data Archives organization No need for ID nor justification of requests Universal, free & easy access Administrative Court (enforcement & appeals)

Federal Institute for Access to Public Information (IFAI) • Authority in the Executive Branch (Federal P.A.) • Five Commissioners: President appointments, Senate approval • Tenure, Seven years appointment • Autonomy: Decision, budget, administrative and legal •

Decisions are mandatory for Federal Executive Branch

IFAI’s main tasks: 1. Privacy rights enforcement 2. Enforcement of transparency obligations 3. Rule on appeals 4. Disseminate enhance

benefits

culture

accountability

of

of

FOIA

transparency

and &

Mandatory Information on Internet • Directory, organizational structure, tasks, services • Salaries & benefits of public officials • Budget, public finances • Contracts, procurement, concessions, permits, authorizations • Subsidies, Citizen participation mechanisms • Audit results • Legal framework (regulations)

Evaluation of transparency obligations (2004-05) TIPE OF INFORMATION

EVALUATION (2003)

EVALUATION (2004)

EVALUATION (2005)

Finances (38%)

30

70.4

84.9

Regulatory (18%)

40

90.3

96.6

Decision making process (14%)

30

68.2

84.1

Society institutional links (18%)

75

90.5

96.4

Internal Organization (6%)

70

96.3

98.6

Basic information (6%)

65

97.6

98.8

General average

52

80.6

90.7

(weighted value)

Transparency obligations: impact of publicity

Federal Departments

First Public evaluation (2003)

Second Public evaluation (2004)

Third Public evaluation (2005)

Defense (SEDENA)

30

30

78

Housing (Infonavit)

30

30

19

CIDE

32

62

93

Arts (INBA)

34

34

85

Agriculture (SAGARPA)

36

37

97

Foreign Affairs (SRE)

36

36

100

Intelligence Agency (CISEN)

30

70

70

Department of Justice (PGR)

42

100

100

Federal Police (PFP)

37

100

100

Deregulation Commission (Cofemer)

42

41

100

PEMEX

35

63

100

Electricity Commission (LFC)

36

50

82

Treasury Department (SHCP)

34

93

100

Requests by subject (2003)

Datos Personales 4%

Estructura Orgánica 12%

Otros 16%

Auditoría 1% |

Gastos 10%

Contratos 7%

Remuneraciones 6%

Actividades de la Institución 16%

Programas de Subsidio 5%

Inf. generada o administrada por la institución 23%

Requests by subject (2004) Auditoria 0% Contratos 11%

Datos personales Gastos 9% 4%

Actividades de la institución 23% Programa de subsidio 5%

Estructura orgánica 9% Remuneraciones 6%

Información generada o administrada por la institución 33%

Requests up to January ‘05 Requests, Responses & Appeals (27/jan/2005) CONCEPT

2003

2004

2005

TOTAL

Total of requests of information

24.097

37.732

2.804

64.633

Total of responses

21.334

34.291

2.377

58.002

99

2.165

APPEALS TO IFAI

636

1.430

Petitioners profile (gender) PORCENTAJE DE SOLICITUDES PRESENTADAS POR SEXO

2004

2003

Femenino 34.8%

Femenino 40.5%

M asculino 65.2%

M asculino 59.5%

Petitioners profile (occupation) OCUPACIÓN DE LOS SOLICITANTES DE INFORMACIÓN

2004

Gubernamental 12.5% Empresarial 19.9%

2003 Gubernamental 12.4%

M. de Comunicación 9.0%

Empresarial 22.8%

Otros 25.8%

Otros 25.2% Académico 33.4%

M. de Comunicación 10.0%

Académico 29.0%

Petitioners profile (age) Petitioners profile by age 0,6

70 y mas 65-69

2,1

60-64

2,0 2,4

55-59 50-54

4,5 7,3

45-49

8,9

40-44 35-39

10,9 16,7

30-34

21,3

25-29 18,1

20-24 3,0

18-19 < 18

2,4 0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

Petitioners by State I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

ENTIDADES FEDERATIVAS ORIGEN DE LAS SOLICITUDES DE INFORMACIÓN ENTIDAD FEDERATIVA

2004 %

2003 %

Aguascalientes Baja California Baja California Sur Campeche Chiapas Chihuahua Coahuila Colima Distrito Federal Durango Guanajuato Guerrero Hidalgo Jalisco México Michoacán Morelos

0,6 1,0 0,3 0,3 1,3 0,4 1,0 2,2 49,6 0,7 1,5 0,8 1,0 2,9 14,1 1,1 0,9

0,7 1,5 0,3 0,5 0,9 0,5 1,1 2,2 50,4 0,7 1,0 0,4 0,8 3,4 13,0 1,0 1,7

Petitioners by State II ENTIDADES FEDERATIVAS ORIGEN DE LAS SOLICITUDES DE INFORMACIÓN ENTIDAD FEDERATIVA

2004 %

2003 %

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Nayarit Nuevo León Oaxaca Puebla Querétaro Quintana Roo San Luis Potosí Sinaloa Sonora Tabasco Tamaulipas Tlaxcala Veracruz Yucatán Zacatecas Total

0,2 2,7 0,5 2,9 1,1 0,6 0,7 1,0 1,3 1,5 2,3 0,3 2,1 1,0 0,6 98,4

0,2 2,7 1,1 3,1 1,0 0,6 0,5 1,5 1,3 1,0 1,0 0,4 2,6 1,1 0,3 98,6

•

Other countries

1,6

1,4

Dependencias

Agencies with the highest number of requests (June ’04)

1

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

SHCP IMSS SEP SEMARNAT SEGOB SFP PRESIDENCIA PGR SCT SEDENA CFE SSA S.R.E. SEDESOL SAGARPA PEMEX SAT ASA CNA SEDESOL

Dependencias

Agencies with the highest number of requests (January ’05)

SHCP IMSS SEP SEMARNAT SFP SEGOB PGR ST SEDENA PRESIDENCIA SSA CFE ASA S.R.E. SAT SE PEMEX SAGARPA IFAI SEDESOL

1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Appeals presented to IFAI (2003-2004)

Appeals decisions (1730)

Total %

Confirms denial of access

16

Rules in favor of access (partial/total)

45

Access granted before IFAI’s ruling (partial / total) 11 Ruling based on procedural factors Total

28 100

Appeals by Commissioner presenting the case (2003-2004)

Commissioner presenting the case

AGRV

HAAA

JOLP

JPGA

MML

TOTAL

19

19

18

26

18

100

18.5

15.5

22

24

20

100

15.5

29.5

14

20

21

100

17

19

21

23

20

100

23

25

17

15

20

100

Confirms denial of access Rules in favor of access (partial/total)

Access granted before IFAI’s ruling Access granted (partial/total)

Ruling based on procedural factors

Success stories I • Savings & Loans Security Commission (IPAB-Fobaproa): accountability in banking system rescue • Public Funds & Trusts (transparency vs banking secrecy) • Personal access to medical files

Success stories II • Assumptions and notes on calculations on economic projections (Treasury) • Infractors and fines for violations of federal regulation (Environment, Transportation, etc.)

Success stories III • Decision making process in Mexico – Cuba crisis • PEMEX-GATE: public version of law suit files • Files on political repression assassinations in 1971 (genocide)

&

Success Stories IV • Transparency in military procurement • Audit results and public version of administrative files

Resistance • Law-suits against FOIA (Departments, agencies) • Law-suits against IFAI ruling (public servants) • Inexistent information (archive chaos) • Lack of compliance with IFAI’s ruling

Impacts • Reduces Corruption (procurement) • Improves Governmental Efficiency (publics servants consumption of FOIA) • Enhances Legitimacy & Confidence in Government

Infocancun - 2005 International conference of Information commissioners • • • •

Power of Access to Public Information Cancun, Mexico, February 20-23 2005 www.ifai.org.mx www.icic-cancun.org.mx