Freedom of Information vs. Privacy and Security in Democracy

Introduction

The terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 highlighted the security vulnerabilities of the United States. While the federal government was quick to respond to this event — subsequently passing the USA Patriot Act — the changes that followed served to reignite the debate over freedom of information versus privacy and security. At a time when both the federal government and the American people want more freedom of information, a direct question arises as to how these two unique needs can be met within the context of social and legal discourse.

With the realization that freedom of information and privacy and security represent such a unique dichotomy for American society, there is a clear impetus to consider both sides of this debate and the challenges that arise in balancing these issues. This research considers the debate over freedom of information versus privacy and security, specifically examining: the importance of freedom of information, the ways in which freedom of information can compromise privacy and security, and potential methods that could be used to improve outcomes in this area. Through a careful review of these issues, it will be possible to elucidate the challenges that arise when freedom of information is weighed against privacy and security.

Freedom of Information: An Overview

A critical review of freedom of information in the United States demonstrates that the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), passed in 1966, is the historical basis for the debate about information freedom in the United States [1]. According to one scholar, the Act is unique because the "legislation works by conferring to the public the legal right to ask for and receive information held by public bodies. Enforceability is what sets FOI laws apart from general pledges of access to information made by governments. In the United States, the FOIA is enforceable in court..." [1]. That scholar further reports that even though the law provides citizen access to information, it relies on a system of exemptions through which the federal government may restrict access to specific types of information. As such, if a government agency wishes to deem certain material inappropriate for the public, it must receive a federal decree to restrict access.

Although the FOIA provides clear guidelines for allowing the transfer of information from government to citizens, researchers report that in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, President Bush made extensive efforts to restrict the freedom of information available to individuals and non-government agencies [2]. Citing national security as the central reason for these restrictions, scholars have argued that the basic rights conferred under the Freedom of Information Act were markedly compromised as a result [2]. Restrictions on freedom of information make it more difficult for the American public to effectively ensure transparency and accountability in government — the original intention of the FOIA legislation [2].

With a basic overview of the current FOIA legislation and its recent problems established, it is now possible to consider the difficulties that could arise from restricting freedom of information. Reviewing the development of the FOIA, it becomes evident that the central purpose of freedom of information, as envisioned by the federal government, was to increase transparency and accountability in government operations [3]. Supporters of the legislation argued that without this Act in place, the government would not be held accountable for its actions, and that freedom of information provides citizens with a clear understanding of the how and why of government action [3].

When placed in this context, significant problems may arise as a result of removing freedom of information. Without access to information, citizens would be at the mercy of government, having no real understanding of how bureaucracy works. This could prompt the development of more extensive corruption in government and create a situation in which citizens are literally disenfranchised from those who govern them. Scholars examining this issue have gone so far as to argue that freedom of information is a democratic right that, if removed from legal discourse, would compromise the ability of American citizens to effectively participate in and sustain a democracy [2].

Privacy and Security

Researchers examining freedom of information report that in an effort to safeguard the privacy of both the federal government and the American public, protocols have been put in place that effectively limit the amount and type of information available to the public [4]. Where privacy or security are dominant concerns, efforts are made to restrict access to information [2]. This safeguard helps ensure that critical personal information is not provided to individuals who could use it to harm others. Of increasing importance in this area is the ability of agencies to protect individuals from identity theft. As the use of computer technology has expanded access to information, further safeguards are needed to ensure that privacy and security are protected [4].

Although access to information is clearly important for ensuring that democracy endures, the reality is that without safeguards to protect security and privacy, the broader context of a democracy fails. Researchers have been quick to note that balancing freedom of information with privacy and security is one of the greatest challenges facing democratic society [2]. If privacy and security are not maintained, the federal government will be unable to effectively govern, and disorder may ensue. Without adequate privacy and security protections, the federal government would be highly ineffective in its efforts to support the American people. This underscores the true nature of the dichotomy that exists in this situation.

While the need for privacy and security is clear, there are a host of threats that extend beyond the legislative limits of the FOIA. Although the Freedom of Information Act provides safeguards that can protect sensitive information, scholars argue that in recent years the proliferation of computer technology has created new vulnerabilities with significant ramifications for safety and security [5]. In order to effectively manage and evaluate information, the government now uses complex information technology (IT) infrastructure that is vulnerable to attack [5]. The question of privacy and security thus becomes one of determining how to protect private and secure information from exposure through weak IT systems.

Examined in this context, it becomes clear that the application of computer technology to the freedom of information debate has further exacerbated the dilemma. While computer and information technology systems are clearly needed to ensure that agencies can manage and analyze data, they have also created a notable vulnerability with respect to the public's overall access to information. Researchers argue that freedom of information is increasingly being compromised in an effort to ensure that privacy and security remain central priorities for protecting individual citizens from harm. Therefore, even though freedom of information is an important part of social and political development, efforts to protect sensitive data and personal information appear to be taking precedence over the right to access information freely.