by the Australian Law Reform Commission.
Attorney General Brandis asked the ALRC to "review Commonwealth legislation to identify provisions that unreasonably encroach upon traditional rights, freedoms and privileges."
The inquiry reflects a commitment made before the 2013 election. As noted at the time common law rights and freedoms are limited. Judges, rarely, 'find' new rights not previously uncovered.
Other rights (the FOI right to access government information and the right to privacy are two of many examples) find their way into law through statute and international instruments. You won't find this sort of thing in the Magna Carta. Legions of Sir Humphreys managed to ward off Freedom of Information legislation in the UK until it finally took effect in 2005.
Thus while freedom of speech got a specific mention in the terms of reference list of traditional rights, and in the Issues Paper, freedom of information didn't.
I dropped a short note to the commission:
While a fundamental right and freedom recognised in international law, the common law in Australia, drawing on British traditions, does not recognise a right to information.
This freedom is not listed in the terms of reference for the inquiry. However freedom of information and Commonwealth laws that encroach on this right should not pass without comment in your report.
For example, Secrecy Laws and Open Government in Australia (ALRC Report 112) identified 506 secrecy provisions in 176 pieces of legislation and made 61 recommendations for reform. The report refers to the chilling effect this complex framework has on open government, transparency and the right to access information. The report was tabled in March 2010 and has not, as yet, been implemented.
Many aspects of the Freedom of Information Act fall short of emerging international standards.
The statutory review of the FOI act conducted by Dr Allan Hawke in 2012-13 recommended a comprehensive review of the kind he was unable to undertake. There has been no government response.
As to freedom of information and its place in the law, UNESCO describes freedom of information as
"an integral part of the fundamental right of freedom of expression, as recognized by Resolution 59 of the UN General Assembly adopted in 1946, as well as by Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), which states that the fundamental right of freedom of expression encompasses the freedom to “to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”.
The United Nations' Human Rights Committee (General Comment 34) states that freedom of information is integral to human rights under international law "essential for the promotion and protection of human rights." Access to government information, which the committee considers an element of freedom of expression, is an "indispensable condition for the full development of the person" and "the foundation stone for every free and democratic society."
FOI has also been enshrined as a corollary of freedom of expression in other major international instruments, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) and the American Convention on Human Rights (1969)."
The right of access to government information isn't absolute and must be balanced and adjusted over time to reflect other rights and public interests.
But not taken away or without reason diminished.
I didn't mention the potential encroachment on the enjoyment of the right arising from the Attorney General's intention to legislate the Office of Australian Information Commissioner out of existence.
Maybe the Senate will stop that one.