OPINION> FROM THE CHINESE PRESS
In the name of 'State secrets'
(China Daily)
Updated: 2009-11-05 08:41

On Monday, the Supreme Court drafted regulations for proceedings of administrative cases on the disclosure of government information. But without an amendment to the Law on State Secrets, local governments will not stop using the ruse of State secrets to deny people information, says an article in Shanghai Morning Post. Excerpts:

There has been a deluge of administrative proceedings since the regulations on disclosure of government information was published. Faced with so many cases against governments for withholding information, some local courts have been simply rejecting them. But the new rules the Supreme Court drafted on Monday will now increase the workload of the courts.

Related readings:
In the name of 'State secrets' Natural disaster toll no longer state secret
In the name of 'State secrets' Efficient and transparent use of govt funds urged
In the name of 'State secrets' Make probe transparent
But we are still very far from seeing transparent governments. In fact, if a government organ withholds information in the name of State secret, a court can hardly decide whether the information is really to be kept "secret", because only a government has the right to categorize what is and what is not a State secret.

So will the Supreme Court's new regulations stop local governments from using "State secret" as a pretext to withhold information from the public? Not very likely.

On one hand, the law on the disclosure of State secrets says they cover national economic and social development, scientific and technological innovation and other matters recognized by related government department as secrets. This vague definition of State secrets allows government organs to hold back even information that can easily be made public.

On the other hand, the law says: "State organs and units at various levels shall classify State secrets in these organs and units." That means government organs are entitled to decide what is and what is not a State secret on the basis of their own interpretation.

It is precisely this contradiction that calls for an amendment to the Law on State Secrets to explain what can be classified as a State secret. Without it, the new regulations do not make much sense.

(China Daily 11/05/2009 page9)