Freedom of information - what freedom?

The failure of state organizations to release information requested under Freedom of Information (FOI) laws, often by delaying the release for months or hiding behind "privacy" issues, is a complex issue that involves several psychological, bureaucratic, and cultural factors. Here’s an adapted explanation of why this happens:

1. Bureaucratic Group Dynamics and Conformity

• Institutional Pressure to Conform: Within state organizations, there is often a strong pressure to conform to established practices, even if those practices involve delaying or withholding information. Employees may go along with these tactics because they perceive it as "the way things are done" within the organization.
• Fear of Repercussions: Employees may fear retaliation or disapproval from superiors if they release information too readily, especially if it goes against the organization's unofficial stance on transparency.

2. Deference to Authority

• Obedience to Superiors: Many individuals within state organizations are conditioned to follow directives from higher-ups without question. If senior officials signal that information should be withheld or delayed, lower-level employees may comply, even if it means violating the spirit of FOI laws.
• Responsibility Shifting: Employees may justify their actions by believing they are simply "following orders" from their superiors, thus shifting the moral and legal responsibility away from themselves.

3. Role Adaptation and Moral Disengagement

• Role Justification: Employees within state organizations may adapt their roles to see themselves as protectors of the institution, rather than as facilitators of public transparency. This role adaptation allows them to morally disengage from the consequences of withholding information.
• Compartmentalization: Individuals may separate their duties at work from their personal ethics, allowing them to rationalize delays or refusals to release information as part of their job, even if it conflicts with broader societal expectations of transparency.

4. Altering Organizational Norms

• Rationalization: State organizations may develop internal rationales for delaying or withholding information, such as the belief that releasing certain data could harm public confidence or national security. These rationalizations can become ingrained, leading to a culture of non-transparency.
• Shifting Norms: Over time, the normalization of delays and refusals can shift the organizational norms, making it standard practice to resist FOI requests rather than comply with them promptly.

5. The Stigma of Transparency

• Cultural Resistance: In some state organizations, transparency is still stigmatized. There may be a belief that releasing information, especially sensitive or potentially damaging information, could be harmful to the institution's reputation or operations.
• Fear of Exposure: Just as whistleblowers in private organizations face stigmatization, those within state organizations who advocate for transparency may be seen as disloyal or even as a threat to the organization's stability.

6. Privacy and Security as Justifications

• Overuse of Privacy Exemptions: Privacy laws and concerns about national security can be legitimate reasons to withhold information. However, these justifications are sometimes overused or misapplied to prevent the release of information that could be embarrassing or politically damaging.
• Ambiguity in Privacy Laws: The interpretation of privacy laws can be subjective, leading to inconsistent application. In some cases, organizations may err on the side of caution—or convenience—by withholding more information than necessary.

7. Institutional Inertia and Delays

• Bureaucratic Inefficiency: State organizations are often slow-moving, with multiple layers of approval required before information can be released. This bureaucratic inertia can result in significant delays in responding to FOI requests.
• Lack of Resources: In some cases, delays may be due to a genuine lack of resources, such as understaffed FOI departments or inadequate systems for retrieving and reviewing information.

8. Lack of Accountability and Transparency

• Weak Enforcement: If there is little to no accountability for failing to comply with FOI laws, state organizations may feel emboldened to delay or deny requests without fear of consequences.
• Cultural Norms of Secrecy: In many state organizations, there is a long-standing culture of secrecy. Changing this culture requires strong leadership, clear policies, and a commitment to transparency that goes beyond mere compliance with the law.

Conclusion

The failure of state organizations to release information as required by Freedom of Information laws is driven by a mixture of bureaucratic dynamics, deference to authority, and the overuse of privacy and security justifications. These factors create an environment where delaying or denying information requests becomes normalized, with little regard for the public's right to transparency. Addressing these issues requires cultural change within organizations, stronger enforcement of FOI laws, and a commitment to upholding the principles of transparency and accountability in government.