FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2685197476> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2685197476 abstract "The Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) enacted by the Westminster Parliament applies to public authorities in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and to UK public authorities that operate in Scotland e.g. the BBC, whilst the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), promulgated by the Scottish Parliament, applies to Scottish public authorities. Both Acts commenced on 1st January 2005, and have been hailed as success stories – helping the public and the press to obtain information on issues such as: problems with a nuclear reactor, inadequate health services, school closures, a lack of suitable quality housing for people with disabilities and so forth. Nevertheless, FOIA has been described as ‘a brilliant piece of trompe l’oeil, a sheep in wolf’s clothing,’ appearing to offer a legally enforceable right of access to governmental information subject only to specified and justifiable exemptions when, in fact, it offers weak information access rights. By contrast, it has been asserted that ‘Scotland has most robust Freedom of Information regime in the UK.’ A two-strand approach is used to test the veracity of these claims and determine whether both jurisdictions have freedom of information laws that are fit for purpose as the Acts enter their second decade. Firstly, an assessment of the degree of compliance of both Acts with principles that have been endorsed by the United Nations as forming the normative foundations of freedom of information laws is undertaken. Secondly, the Acts are compared to ascertain whether FOISA does in fact offer stronger information access rights than FOIA, and if so, what lessons the UK could draw upon to strengthen FOIA. The analysis will demonstrate that the Acts are creatures of their respective Parliaments and that distinct ‘political cultures’ have influenced their evolution over the past ten years leading to significant divergences between the two. It concludes that, at present, FOISA offers stronger information access rights whereas FOIA offers weaker rights, but both Acts should be amended to ensure full compliance with the UN endorsed principles if both jurisdictions are to have information rights that are fit for purpose as the Acts enter their second decade." @default.
• W2685197476 created "2017-06-30" @default.
• W2685197476 creator A5077860281 @default.
• W2685197476 date "2017-01-01" @default.
• W2685197476 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2685197476 title "Information Access Rights in FOIA and FOISA Fit for Purpose?" @default.
• W2685197476 doi "https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2985737" @default.
• W2685197476 hasPublicationYear "2017" @default.
• W2685197476 type Work @default.
• W2685197476 sameAs 2685197476 @default.
• W2685197476 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2685197476 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2685197476 hasAuthorship W2685197476A5077860281 @default.
• W2685197476 hasBestOaLocation W26851974762 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConcept C2775833480 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConcept C2781440851 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConcept C3116431 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConcept C44725695 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConcept C61326887 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConcept C75952962 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConceptScore W2685197476C144024400 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConceptScore W2685197476C17744445 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConceptScore W2685197476C190253527 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConceptScore W2685197476C199539241 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConceptScore W2685197476C2775833480 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConceptScore W2685197476C2781440851 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConceptScore W2685197476C3116431 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConceptScore W2685197476C44725695 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConceptScore W2685197476C61326887 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConceptScore W2685197476C75952962 @default.
• W2685197476 hasConceptScore W2685197476C94625758 @default.
• W2685197476 hasLocation W26851974761 @default.
• W2685197476 hasLocation W26851974762 @default.
• W2685197476 hasOpenAccess W2685197476 @default.
• W2685197476 hasPrimaryLocation W26851974761 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W1528270836 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W1582736351 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2069805644 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2077469674 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2136387943 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2215634193 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2237701992 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2257398458 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2280839031 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2317610886 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2325135393 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2493100989 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2780866082 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2807088513 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2883865232 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W3011857216 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W3049552631 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W3171279832 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W349881986 @default.
• W2685197476 hasRelatedWork W2912347040 @default.
• W2685197476 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2685197476 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2685197476 magId "2685197476" @default.
• W2685197476 workType "article" @default.