Dunce among dunces, here is a very unenviable double position. Canada ranks poorly in the world with its Access to Information Act, and within Canada, Quebec ranks lowest in the national rankings. In short, in this fundamental matter for open societies, the Canadian and Quebec situations are frankly mediocre and undemocratic.
“One of the main problems in Canada concerns the delays in delivering the documents requested”, summarizes Toby Mendel, director of the Center for Law and Democracy (CLD), a Canadian NGO promoting fundamental rights, including freedom of expression or of association, digital freedoms or the right to information. “In most Canadian governments, the 30-day deadlines [pour répondre à une demande] are constantly extended. In Nova Scotia, you need the agreement of the Board of Control to grant an extension, and this authority grants and renews it almost systematically at 60 days, then at three months, then at four, and so on. This is a very problematic attitude of governments and institutions in Canada. »
A ludicrous case has recently surfaced: a researcher was asked for 21 million and imposed a 65-year deadline by Library and Archives Canada to deliver documents, claimed under the law, concerning an investigation of corruption carried out by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
Negative evaluations also accumulate in relation to the countless restrictions and redactions authorized by the legislation. “The primary reflex of the administration is to reject a request, and the law serves more and more to withhold rather than disseminate information”, sums up a recent file from Radio-Canada documenting Quebec restrictions, including using a “consultation mechanism”. The duty published on Tuesday the request of about fifteen organizations to review the Quebec law and other severe criticisms of the practices in force here.
Examples to follow
The CLD body run by Mr Mendel, in conjunction with Access Info Europe, has coined the Global Right to Know Index (RTI) to rank countries by comparing their access laws.
At the last report (2021), out of a possible 150 maximum points, Canada obtained 93 points, which placed it at 53e rank out of 133 countries, just ahead of Peru, Argentina and Guatemala.
With a score of 81, Quebec is at the back of the Canadian pack with Saskatchewan, Alberta and New Brunswick. This mark, equivalent to 54% on a school report, would place Quebec law in a group of world-class dunces including Israel, the Netherlands, but also Burkina Faso and the United States.
Classification is done strictly on the basis of the law and not its application, which can further complicate access. The best law (such as Afghanistan’s), if not enforced, is more difficult than a lesser one that is fully enforced. And obviously, access to information is not the only bulwark against corruption, far from it.
The Scandinavian countries reputed to be the most transparent in the world do not excel so well, according to the RTI world index: Finland totals 105 points, but Denmark, only 64 points. CLD Director Toby Mendel cites Sri Lanka (4e rank) and Mexico (2e) as examples to follow.
“Documents are obtained, and quickly in these countries,” he says. The Mexican access commission is reputed to be strong and efficient. In Mexico, government documents are much more likely to be released quickly than in Canada. In Sri Lanka, decisions are rendered in about 20 days, a month at most, whereas in Quebec, it takes a minimum of 100 days for the same result. »
He also notes that in the countries to be imitated, citizens are much more committed to these issues. “If you ask Montrealers, a small percentage will have an opinion on this subject, whereas in India or Sri Lanka, the first rickshaw driver knows the law and will tell you that it is very important,” says Mr. Mendel. , a frequent traveller, citing personal experiences.
Georgia and Quebec
Mr. Mendel is currently in Georgia, where he is preparing a report on the state of the media in this Caucasian republic. He took advantage of his stay to participate in a conference on access to information. Georgian practice in this area is governed by an administrative code dating back to the 1990s. “It’s weak and insufficient,” says Mendel. Georgia needs a government entity dedicated to this cause, like the Commission d’accès à l’information in Quebec. »
The last Quebec Liberal government, which had undertaken to revise the access law, tabled in extremis a project deemed mediocre by many, which was ultimately not adopted. The Coalition avenir Québec government elected in 2018 modernized the law on the protection of personal information, but did not touch the access to information law.
In either case (with all the necessary nuances), the sociopolitical context does not favor reform, in particular because the strong governments in place in Quebec and Tbilisi are facing very weak opposition. The news media crisis is adding pitfalls everywhere. In Georgia, however, the presenter and owner of a TV channel, Nika Gvaramia, has just been imprisoned.
Democracy presupposes an open society where the decisions of the state are publicly debated. Access to information, used by political parties, the media, pressure groups and ordinary citizens, ensures and increases the accountability and transparency of institutions.
The first law of its kind was passed in Sweden in 1766 (in the middle of the XVIIIe century!), and the second only dates from 1951, in Finland. The United States followed in 1966 and Canada in 1983. The Act respecting access to documents held by public bodies in Quebec was unanimously adopted exactly 40 years ago, on June 22, 1982, making it another major legacy of René Lévesque.