On April 12, at the first session, the National Assembly discussed in the hall the draft Law on Access to Information (amended).
Many opinions in the hall focused on clarifying core issues such as ensuring people's right to access information, enhancing the responsibility of local authorities, and promoting digital transformation associated with data quality.
At the same time, improve the information provision process in a transparent and convenient direction and minimize administrative procedures.
Delegate Huynh Ngoc Liem (Lam Dong delegation) said that the amendment of the Law this time is meaningful not only in completing a law on administrative procedures but more deeply in completing a mechanism to enforce the constitutional rights of the people in the context of digital transformation and organizing 2-level local government along with the formation of a new legal system on data and personal data protection.
According to delegate Liem, the project dossier has pointed out 5 major bottlenecks that need to be removed, including: information providers; information boundaries that are accessible and not accessible; public burden; cumbersome procedures and requirements for synchronization with new data laws.
This delegate added that the draft has placed digital transformation and multi-channel information provision as the main axis. This is the right direction, because accessing information today is not just about submitting applications and waiting for results, but must be a convenient, timely, and verifiable access in the digital environment.
Along with that is the expansion of responsibility for providing information to public non-business units, providing essential public services is in line with practical requirements. Delegate Liem noted that if the institution is not strict, the information access mechanism may be exploited.
Believing that the Law on Access to Information is a law on democracy, based on voters' opinions, delegate Hoang Thi Thanh Thuy (Tay Ninh delegation) proposed handling the harmonious relationship between state management on security, safety and citizens' rights, on transparency and access.
According to Deputy Thuy, protecting state secrets and information security with citizens' right to access information is inherently a dialectical relationship, both supporting and containing each other. From the perspective of the conflict between security and transparency, the wider the information ban zone, the narrower it will inadvertently narrow people's access to information.
In fact, in the past time, there have been cases of individuals, organizations, and agencies abusing the protection of state secrets in internal information to become an excuse to restrict citizens' access to information, reducing publicity, transparency, democratic rights, supervision of the people and evading accountability.
From the above analysis, delegate Hoang Thi Thanh Thuy proposed narrowing the scope of confidential information. If the document belongs to state secrets, instead of refusing to access the entire document, consider separating the content of the publicly disclosed part that is not harmful to national and ethnic interests as stipulated in the Law on Protection of State Secrets regarding state secrets to provide to citizens.
Regarding information disclosure, it is clearly stipulated in Articles 17 to 22 of the draft law on information that must be disclosed, form, time of information disclosure, and handling of inaccurate public information.
However, in reality, there are small things, but if not paid attention to rectification, it will lose the role and meaning of information disclosure. That is the mentality of disclosure for reporting, not disclosure for use.
Therefore, I propose to amend Clause 2, Article 3 on the principle of information access, which is that information must be provided accurately, fully, promptly, and easily used. Adding an additional clause in Article 18 on the form and time of information disclosure is "information disclosed on the electronic environment must ensure technical standards for open data..." - the delegate expressed his opinion.
