After 34 years since the first version of the Freedom of Information bill was first filed in 1992 by former Pangasinan representative Oscar Orbos, the most recent bill, HB 9937 was passed with 284 votes with no opposition or abstention. The next move will now come from the bicameral conference committee which will reconcile differences between the House and Senate versions, the latter filed by Senator Francis Pangilinan in 2025. Described as a “game changer,” the vote is seen as a response to questions on alleged irregularities in the flood control projects and use of confidential funds.

It is too early to celebrate its passage as it was at this stage in 2001 during the 11th Congress when the bicameral conference failed to pass it. Today, after 34 years, Congress is more hopeful that it would join the 120 countries which had passed some form of freedom of information legislation. Studies show that the FOI Act of 1716 is the oldest. The FOI legislation is a response to the increasing dissatisfaction with the lack of transparency on government policy development and decision-making. A basic principle behind the freedom of information legislation is that the burden of proof falls on the body asked for information, not the person asking for it. Too, that information should be disclosed unless there is a valid reason for withholding it such as national security, personal data or cultural sensitivity.

From Wikepedia and other sources (Lawfil, local advocacy initiatives), we gathered information on FOI trends in various countries of the world. The current trend reflects a growth towards greater accountability and public participation in decision-making processes. A slow adoption is shown in the Middle East with only a few countries like Jordan and Yemen having enacted such law. Iran and Syria are examples where government transparency is severely limited and citizens have no legal recourse to access public information. In many countries, FOI does exist but are hindered by bureaucratic delays, excessive fees, or lack of compliance. Integration of digital technologies and protection of whistleblowers and journalists who utilize them to expose corruption are among the current trends. In Oceania, countries like Kiribati, Tonga, and Vanuatu still lack legislation on FOI. North Korea remains one of the most closed societies. Sweden’s Act of 1716 appears to be the oldest.

In 2015, the UNESCO General Conference voted to designate September 28 as “International Day of the Universal Access to Information. Among countries in the Asian region which had already passed an FOI include Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, Japan, Malaysia, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, and Thailand. The Philippines FOI policy which was signed during former President Duterte’s tenure was an executive order and did not incluse the legislative and judicial branches.

It is believed that the bill was stuck in Congress for more than three decades, and often stalled due to concern over its potential to damage public officials’ reputation.

The bill is expected to create an independent Right to Information Commission to oversee implementation and enforce transparency requirements across government. It will require agencies to publish information of public interest and covers all branches of government, constitutional commissions, local government units, state universities and colleges, and government-owned and controlled corporations.

While it is one of the more popular bills as it is believed to address many of the country’s current concerns such as corruption and inefficiency in the delivery of government services, it was perceived as controversial especially by power-holders who rightly realize that improving access, flow and exchange of information would result in the dilution of the power that they now control.

The struggle to get it passed involved a large sector of our progressive sectors who believe that progress can only be achieved with the sharing of information and power. During the past three decades, the campaign to have it passed involved most of the unheard and unseen voices from below – farm workers and fisherfolk. Indigenous groups, the academe, the Church, women and youth. Among the more visible and active lobbyists included the professionals in media and communication, labor, and youth groups.

The bill is at the stage similar to that of the 11th Congress in 1998 to 2001 when its approval was aborted during the bicameral session due to lack of quorum.

The experience of most countries implementing FOI laws is the importance of building trust, and empowering journalists and civil society who are the principal implementors and beneficiaries.

I am sure our colleagues from other countries are watching with great interest the fate of the legislation during the coming bicameral meeting. It is perhaps one of the bills in our legislative history which had gone through some of the most challenging times in the history of political lobby. ([email protected])