Government reviews Bolsonaro’s secrecy and opens most cases – 02/03/2023 – Power

The CGU (Comptroller General of the Union) reviewed 234 secrecy of public information imposed during the government of Jair Bolsonaro (PL) and created new criteria expanding access to public data.

Among the cases are the entrances of former President Bolsonaro’s children to the Planalto Palace and the disciplinary process that cleared federal deputy Eduardo Pazuello (PL-RJ) for participating in a political act with the then president when he was still an active general.

The case of Bolsonaro’s vaccination card does not yet have a decision made.

“It involves important reflections, there is a dimension about privacy that cannot be left aside”, said CGU Minister Vinicius de Carvalho.

The review of secrecy imposed by Bolsonaro was a decision made by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) during his inauguration. The president gave 30 days for the CGU to analyze the cases and determine the opening in cases where secrecy was excessive.

“You can’t say that everyone [os casos serão publicizados]there may be cases where, for technical reasons, secrecy is maintained”, said Carvalho.

According to him, it should take between 60 and 90 days for the body to review the 234 cases and give an opinion on each one of them, revoking the secrecy or not. In all cases, the data must be provided to the person who placed the order.

In the case of the process involving Minister Pazuello, Carvalho exemplified, there are ten cases under analysis at the CGU.

The statements defined by the CGU say that records of entrances and exits from public buildings must be provided, except when they involve confidential agendas, such as the preparation of an economic plan that has not yet been published or an investigation in progress.

In the case of official residences, public information is that which refers to official agendas.

Another statement by the CGU determines that disciplinary procedures for the military will be made public as of their conclusion, as is the case of Pazuello.

The CGU also restricted the use of common arguments to determine the secrecy of public information, such as the existence of personal data in a document. In this situation, pointed out the minister, it is possible to block out personal information and provide access to the file.

In the case of telegrams, telegraphic dispatches and circulars from the MRE (Ministry of Foreign Affairs), the “protection of negotiations and the country’s diplomatic relations cannot be used as a general and abstract basis for denying access”, pointed out the minister.

In addition to the 12 statements, the CGU made three recommendations for the Executive Branch bodies with the aim of increasing the advertising culture in the federal government.

The first asks for a review of the declassification flows of information that were considered confidential. The idea is that data considered secret are automatically made public when the deadline expires, not requiring a new request.

Another point is the review of the internal rules of the highest body that evaluates requests for LAI (Law of Access to Information), the Mixed Commission for Reassessment of Information to increase control over secrecy determinations. “There are indications of excessive use of the prerogative of classification by some public bodies”, pointed out Carvalho.

Finally, the CGU will recommend that, in the event that the information requester resorts to a denial, the body in question provides the data to the CGU, thus speeding up a final decision and reducing the number of appeals that reach the body.

What does the LAI say about secrecy?

The LAI (Access to Information Act) defines confidential information as that which has access to the public temporarily restricted as it represents a risk to the security of society or the State. Transparency is the rule and secrecy the exception.

Anyone can make a request for access to information to the Executive, Legislative, Judiciary and Public Prosecution bodies, as well as to non-profit private entities that receive public money to carry out projects.

The LAI establishes a deadline of up to 20 days for a response. The denial of access must be justified and an appeal may be made within ten days.

What are the secrecy provided by law?

According to the LAI and the decree that regulates the law, there are three degrees of secrecy classification that can be adopted for information that jeopardizes the defense and national integrity, the life of the population, the financial integrity of the country and intelligence activities, among others. other cases. Are they:

• Top Secret: 25-year secrecy that can be determined by the president and vice president, ministers and authorities with the same prerogative, commanders of the Armed Forces and heads of diplomatic and consular missions;
• Secret: 15 year secrecy. In addition to the aforementioned authorities, it may be determined by holders of autarchies, foundations, public companies and government-controlled companies;
• Reserved: 5 year secrecy. It can be determined by the authorities mentioned and by those who exercise direction and command functions.

In addition to classified information, the law provides for secrecy until the end of the mandate for information that may endanger the safety of the President and Vice President of the Republic, spouses and children.

What are the 100 year sigils?

There is no so-called 100-year secrecy in the Freedom of Information Act. The maximum period of restriction provided for by law is 25 years for top secret information. Transparency experts explain that the recurring term during the Bolsonaro administration came from the distorted interpretation of a device in article 31 of the law.

The excerpt says that personal information that reaches someone’s intimacy, private life, honor and image can have their access restricted for up to one hundred years.

Research carried out by Transparência Brasil shows that during the Bolsonaro administration there was an increase in the inappropriate use of personal data protection to deny information of public interest.

From 2019 to 2022, there were 413 cases of undue denials based on the use of the article. The record was registered in 2019, the first year of the government, in which 140 requests were denied.