Home TA Online 2011 TA Online Penang’s FOI Bill “disgusting”

Penang’s FOI Bill “disgusting”

Follow us on our Malay and English WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram, Tiktok and Youtube channels.

Selangor’s Freedom of Information Bill, being the country’s first, was understandably impaired. But what excuse has Penang to come up with the same paltry replica of Selangor’s FOI Bill, asks Sarajun Hoda Abdul Hassan.

The Selangor State Assembly debating the FOI Bill

The Penang government is inviting feedback on its proposal for a Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill. A closer scrutiny reveals that this enactment proposal is basically a carbon copy of the Selangor FOI Bill that was launched much earlier. The inconsequential changes in two or three sections are limited only to a different choice of words. Otherwise in essence, spirit and meaning, it is exactly the same. Not surprising because it must have come from the same ‘Gani Patail’ camp of thinking.

Like the Selangor FOI Bill, Penang’s FOI Bill is all too pretentious. It is poorly and purposely prepared to fail the state government’s desire for reform from the onset. Despite having access to some of the best legal minds in the country, the Penang Pakatan government did not think it fit to better prepare the Bill before putting it up to the people for their consideration. Appreciate that more than half Penang’s state assembly members from Pakatan are lawyers. Yet, coming with such a vague FOI Bill is not only disappointing but utterly disgusting.

As it is, my story published in Aliran Monthly, Vol.30, No. 9/2010, provided detailed feedback for the Selangor FOI Bill. Those comments stand for the corresponding sections of this Penang FOI Bill. It’s like peas in the same pod. That’s how identical it is, with all the same shortcomings.

READ MORE:  Penang water disruption: Is it a question of no maintenance or lack of money for maintenance?

Again, there is no seriousness by the Penang government to come out with a significantly different or better FOI enactment despite knowing that the Selangor government received loads of comments and input from civil society on its FOI Bill. The Penang government has also had enough time to consider some if not all the recommendations from civil society; yet it just didn’t bother to and superciliously went ahead to come up with almost a carbon copy of the same seriously deficient and flawed Selangor FOI.

Selangor’s FOI Bill, being the country’s first, was understandably impaired. But, what excuse has Penang to come up with the same paltry replica of Selangor’s FOI Bill? It is so very unlike Penang that has always prided itself on being a leader in bringing about reforms in Malaysia. After all, ‘Penang Leads’, right? Yet, this senseless and futile exercise by the state government either takes civil society organisations for fools or it just aims to hoodwink them into thinking that this FOI will put all necessary reforms pertinent to good governance in place while effectively using it as a delaying tactic until the next general election.

With such copious shortcomings, having or not having the FOI enactment makes little difference. With this FOI Bill, freedom of information will just not be forthcoming. For example, there is not a single section anywhere in the proposed enactment that suggests general information shall be freely made available to the public by the various state departments for the sake of good governance. This proactive and unambiguous assertion, which is essential in any FOI enactment, is conveniently and conspicuously missing.

READ MORE:  Water is back! Syabas to the workers!

Why does one need to ask for information? Why not simply post information in publications, public notices or even on official websites? Why does one have to give reasons for accessing any information? And if information can be given once, why not a second time? The information belongs to the people. The state government is merely a temporary caretaker. Why does the public have to pay for what it owns in the first place? Why cannot the public have access to information that belongs to them?

Why does the state government need 30 days to divulge information? In emergency cases, they need seven days. If one is in a fix, police custody for example, and needs information to prove one’s innocence, isn’t seven days too long? Beng Hock was killed even sooner. The most devastating Section 7(3) says, “…if there is no response within the stipulated time, it is deemed rejected.” So easy? And Section 8 says, “…information sought may be refused if the applicant is not entitled to it.” Who decides that?

The FOI Bill is surrounded by a million reasons stipulating why information ‘may’ not be given. Instead of asserting the opening up of access to information, it only speaks about conditions for not divulging information and even more excuses for impeding access. It finally sounds just as haughty, opaque and obfuscating as the Selangor Bill.

The Bill says that it ‘may’ give information, and not SHALL. It hides behind excuses such as “likely to prejudice relations” if disclosed; “likely to cause serious prejudice to state government policy formulations, developments, administration, economic developments, undermine a department, undermine an audit or test, or any documents it gazettes”. Information is also vaguely refused if the access to information interferes with the operation of the department, is deemed inappropriate, vexatious or unreasonable or for repeated application.

READ MORE:  Kawasan air terjun Bayan Lepas dicemari sampah sarap

As well, the fact that appeal board members can be removed anytime without assigning any reason also means that the FOI Bill loses its credence, defeats its consequence, undermines its independence mandate and fails the confidence of the people. There is no separation of powers between the appeal board and the state government, which obviously wants to have it under its full and final control. Then again, the appeal does not work on the basis of the majority. The Chairman can make his unilateral decision and it cannot be challenged in any court. Sound familiar?

Then the guillotine falls down hard. If the information accessed is used for a different reason and purpose, it will invite a fine up to RM50,000 and/or a jail term not exceeding two years. Is this chilling effect not deliberately designed to discourage potential applicants from trying to get information? On the opposite scenario, if the State Official refuses to divulge information in his custody, what then is the punishment?

All in all, it is a kangaroo FOI Bill with a slippery skin of an eel.

Sarajun Hoda Abdul Hassan is an Aliran executive committee member

The views expressed in Aliran's media statements and the NGO statements we have endorsed reflect Aliran's official stand. Views and opinions expressed in other pieces published here do not necessarily reflect Aliran's official position.

AGENDA RAKYAT - Lima perkara utama
  1. Tegakkan maruah serta kualiti kehidupan rakyat
  2. Galakkan pembangunan saksama, lestari serta tangani krisis alam sekitar
  3. Raikan kerencaman dan keterangkuman
  4. Selamatkan demokrasi dan angkatkan keluhuran undang-undang
  5. Lawan rasuah dan kronisme
Support our work by making a donation. Tap to download the QR code below and scan this QR code from Gallery by using TnG e-wallet or most banking apps:
Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
23 Feb 2011 12.42pm

Mr. Sarajun Hoda Abdul Hassa, please tell Penang CAT what are the chenges are needed.The title of your article does not look friendly. Anyway please make

Ong Eu Soon
4 Feb 2011 3.51am

Ask our president what is his stand on the FOI Bill, unquestioning support for LGe?

4 Feb 2011 9.13pm
Reply to  Ong Eu Soon

How about running in your constituency as an independent if you are not on either sides’ Oligarchs? There is a 3rd force being proposed made of KITA, MCLM, PCM, Borneo Front, Konsensus Bebas, HRP, PSM, PRS, PPP !

Though MCLM is very likely a dr.Evil controlled faction, it has it’s uses in displacing the Oligarchs of BN, lapdogs of BN, or Oligarchs of PR.

Then also try this group, I think some of the ideas there could appeal to your interest in city planning as well.


1 Feb 2011 3.13pm

He lost me halfway through the statement, with all that whining. After whinging and complaining, did the writer offer any constructive analysis? Big ‘No’. Sure sounds like someone with an axe to grind.

1 Feb 2011 12.00pm

Penang’s Pakatan Government is just as (unaccountable) as BN ever was. The only difference is, they’re better at hiding it. I’m starting to lose faith in Pakatan as we speak

31 Jan 2011 10.31pm

Aliran, still not too late to slam DAP about the 0.002% quorum EXCO Elections or PKR for the 8.4% quorum part Elections. Show some objectivity on these 2 failures of democracy please! 66.6% quorum MINIMUM. If they are no disciplined or diligent enough, then we cannot trust them at all! Given Pakatan’s propensity for Oligarchy as well, it is unforgivable for Aliran to say nothing!

Aliran’s ‘Elegant Silence’ on these 2 matters grows increasingly DEAFENING on every issue you cover without slamming these 2! Tacit approval of undemocratic practices, whitewash and a non-neutral favouring of Pakatan if anything. Aliran is supposed to be neutral, so be neutral and state facts as they are!

30 Jan 2011 6.06pm

Freedom apa?

Si LGE takut nak release minutes pasal Kampung Buah Pala.

Ang Wee Kiong
Ang Wee Kiong
30 Jan 2011 11.25am

I fully agree that the Penang FOI is NO FOI as what is said by the above writer.

Free means to be on displayed in the public domain adn why so many hindrances and so many ridiculous requirements to access information.

LGE and others in the Penang legislature, do yourselves a favour, don’t take us for fools.

If you want to be different and better than BN, take on different souls, not just change your clothes.

31 Jan 2011 10.37pm
Reply to  Ang Wee Kiong

We don’t have to complain from the sidelines and if you want change, run for candidacy. Nothing to lose face about. It is your democratic right after all. Take up this FOI (also quorumless EXCO or even malicious compliance against refusal to amend laws issue) as a campaiging purpose, and run for candidacy! All MP or Assemblyman’s seats are up for grabs in all elections.

Yap P L
30 Jan 2011 11.17am

The person seeking information from Government must seek it publicly and the information given must be fully available to the public.Therefore there be a public website and a daily newspaper for the purpose. In this way private prejudice and personal advantage can be avoided and Government can be fair to all and more open.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x