[Peace-discuss] Fwd: [SRRTAC-L:8573] Bye!bye! FOIA?

[Alfred Kagan]

>Delivered-To: akagan at alexia.lis.uiuc.edu
>X-Sender: radred at pop.ix.netcom.com
>Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 17:59:26 -0400
>To: SRRT Action Council <srrtac-l at ala.org>
>From: Carol <radred at ix.netcom.com>
>Subject: [SRRTAC-L:8573] Bye!bye! FOIA?
>X-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
>Reply-To: srrtac-l at ala.org
>Sender: owner-srrtac-l at ala.org
>Status:  
>
>Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-7D204E57; 
>charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
>www.nsarchive.org
>
>FOIA: Latest victim of the Bushwhack. You'll get investigated for
>asking for info.
>
>WHAT:
>A provision (Sec. 307) of the House Intelligence Authorization bill
>(HR 4628, now forwarded for House consideration today under HR 497)
>would gut the US FOIA's principle of universal access with an
>amendment that precludes requests for intelligence agency documents
>by any governmental entity not of US origin, their representatives,
>and foreign nationals.  The Senate intelligence authorization bill
>does not contain a similar provision.
>
>IMMEDIATE EFFECTS:
>* Truth commissions, human rights activists, and others will be
>forbidden access to files that aid in national reconciliation and
>transparency.
>* Foreign-born scholars will be prohibited from using the Act.
>* Intelligence agencies will now create investigative files on FOIA
>requesters to determine their suitability for access.
>
>POLITICS/ANALYSIS:
>According to an Administration source, this provision is the 'camel's
>nose under the tent' in terms of attempts to restrict public access
>to intelligence records.  It was added to the bill only in the last
>few days 'under cover of darkness' as it had been previously 'beaten
>down' internally from becoming an Administration proposal.  A
>Statement of Administration policy is being circulated, is negative
>as to the provision, but does not threaten veto.  US State Department
>officially against it because a) its counter to USG policy favoring
>transparency and b) this effort would encourage classified-only
>communications between governments, which is burdensome and self-
>defeating.
>
>ARGUMENTS:
>* If one class of requester can be excluded, which class is next?
>* Congress ought to be concerned with WHAT gets released, not WHO
>gets it.
>* Not one instance of a document released under FOIA that harmed
>national security.
>* Under FOIA, any classified document must be reviewed for release
>against specified criteria, regardless of the identity of the
>requester.
>* House intelligence committee has no clue about the Internet: what's
>released to one is released to all.
>* The 'efficiency argument'--that foreign requesters are a burden on
>declassification resources--is not proven, but for an anecdote in the
>House report.
>
>William Ferroggiaro
>Director
>Freedom of Information Project
>National Security Archive
>www.nsarchive.org
>Tel-(202) 994-7045
>Fax-(202) 994-7005


-- 


Al Kagan
African Studies Bibliographer and Professor of Library Administration
Africana Unit, Room 328
University of Illinois Library
1408 W. Gregory Drive
Urbana, IL 61801, USA

tel. 217-333-6519
fax. 217-333-2214
e-mail. akagan at uiuc.edu