Information Disclosure Ordinance Examination Criteria at Public Safety Commission / Police Headquarters

Information Disclosure Ordinance Examination Criteria at Public Safety Commission / Police Headquarters

First purpose

For the smooth operation of police administration, the understanding and cooperation of the citizens of the prefecture is more necessary than anything else, and from the perspective of responding to the demands of the times to ensure the transparency of the administration and fulfill accountability, information The disclosure of is important. From this point of view, this examination standard interprets and operates the ordinance that should be complied with when deciding whether to disclose or not disclose administrative documents made by the Public Safety Commission and the Chief of Police Headquarters based on the Information Disclosure Ordinance (hereinafter referred to as the "Ordinance"). In addition to the standards stipulated in the "Interpretation and Operational Standards of the Akita Prefecture Information Disclosure Ordinance (Notice of General Affairs Department Manager, General 1849 dated February 1, 2002)", information on public safety, etc. (Ordinance No. 6) The purpose is to contribute to the active disclosure of information while showing the standards for disclosure of administrative documents related to Article Paragraph 1, Item 6) and budget execution, and coordinating with public safety and maintenance of order. ..

Second basic matter

1 Basic concept of public / private

The ordinance clarifies the right to request the disclosure of administrative documents in line with the purpose of local autonomy, and by enhancing measures related to the provision of information held by the prefecture, deepens the understanding and trust of the citizens of the prefecture and deepens their trust in the prefectural government. Since the purpose is to contribute to the development of prefectural government by ensuring fair administrative management and further promoting prefectural government through the participation of citizens of the prefecture, the administrative document disclosure system is based on the idea of disclosure in principle. However, on the other hand, it is necessary to appropriately protect the rights and interests of individuals, corporations, etc. and the public interest, etc., and appropriately weigh the interests of making them public and the interests of being protected by making them private. There is a need.
For this reason, the ordinance stipulates as limited and clear as possible non-public information the minimum necessary information for which there is a reasonable reason not to disclose it, and this non-public information is recorded by the executing agency. Except in some cases, it stipulates that it is obligatory to publish the administrative documents related to the request for publication.
In line with the purpose of these ordinances, the police must fulfill their responsibilities as the executing agency stipulated in Article 3, Paragraph 1 of the ordinance and actively disclose the information they hold.

2 Handling of non-public information

The ordinance stipulates the obligation of the executing agency when non-public information is not recorded in the administrative document pertaining to the request for disclosure in Article 6, Paragraph 1, and when non-public information is recorded, Although not specified, the ordinance is based on the basic idea that the scope of non-public information is limited as much as possible, and the executing agency is stipulated in Article 7 (discretionary disclosure for public interest reasons). However, as an opposite interpretation of "when it is deemed necessary in the public interest, it can be disclosed", it must not be disclosed except "when it is deemed necessary in the public interest".

3 Types of non-public information

The non-public information in each item of Article 6, Paragraph 1 of the Ordinance is classified by focusing on the interests to be protected, and one piece of information may correspond to a plurality of non-public information in each item. In addition, for example, even if the information about a certain individual corresponds to the information in the proviso of item 1 and therefore does not correspond to the non-public information of the same item, it corresponds to the non-public information of another item and is not disclosed. It is possible that
Therefore, when disclosing information, it is necessary to confirm that it does not fall under any of the non-public information in each item of this section.

4 At the time of judgment of non-public information applicability

The applicability of non-public information changes with the passage of time, changes in social conditions, progress of office work and business related to the information, etc., and must be judged each time a request for disclosure is made. Must be. Such changes are considered to be remarkable in the case of non-public information for which "fear" is a requirement. In general, information that corresponds to non-public information at a certain time does not naturally correspond to non-public information at another time.
Therefore, the decision as to whether or not to publish the administrative document pertaining to each request for publication is made at the time of the decision to publish.

Third non-public information

1 Criteria for disclosure of information on public safety, etc. (Ordinance, Article 6, Paragraph 1, Item 6)

Information that is not disclosed as the subject of information on public safety, etc., is based on the purpose of this provision and complies with the provisions of the "Interpretation and Operational Standards of the Akita Prefecture Information Disclosure Ordinance", and prevents, suppresses, and investigates crimes. Appropriately judge the applicability of only those that may hinder the maintenance of public safety and order centered on the enforcement of criminal law represented by.

2 Standards for disclosure of administrative documents related to budget execution

When deciding whether to disclose or not disclose administrative documents related to budget execution, the application of each item of Article 6, Paragraph 1 of the Ordinance must be strictly determined and the judgment must be made in light of individual information.
The standards for disclosure and non-disclosure regarding typical information types in administrative documents related to budget execution are as shown below, but other information that does not belong to these examples is strictly specified in accordance with the purpose and provisions of the ordinance. You must make a public / private decision.

(1) Common matters

A. Third-party information Regarding third-party information recorded in administrative documents related to budget execution, information on individuals (Article 6, Paragraph 1, Item 1 of the Ordinance) and information on corporations, etc. (No. 2 of the same paragraph) ), In addition to those that may cause harm or sabotage to the third party by disclosing the information, and those that are deemed to interfere with police activities such as criminal investigations. It will be kept private from the viewpoint of protecting the rights and interests of third parties and maintaining public safety and order.
B. Information such as the names of police officers The names of police officers are, in principle, open to the public under the provisions of Article 6, Paragraph 1, Item 1 of the Ordinance, but they are engaged in the prevention of crimes, etc. prescribed in Item 6 of the same paragraph. If it is recognized that there is a risk of hindering the maintenance of public safety and order by disclosing the name of a person, etc., or by disclosing the name pursuant to the provisions of item 7 of the same paragraph, life , If there is a risk of interfering with the protection of body, health, life or property, it will be kept private.

(2) Matters concerning travel expenses

Regarding administrative documents related to budget execution related to travel expense expenditure, those that do not correspond to the non-public information stipulated in each item of Article 6, Paragraph 1 of the Ordinance will be disclosed.
When considering the disclosure or non-disclosure of administrative documents related to budget execution related to travel expense expenditure, it is not decided uniformly according to the budget classification of travel expenses (activity travel expenses, general travel expenses, etc.), but individual trips. Judgment must be made based on whether or not there is a risk of interfering with police activities such as individual criminal investigations by disclosing it in light of the purpose and actual situation of.

(3) Matters concerning food costs

Regarding budget execution related documents related to food expenses expenditure, we will make a strict judgment in light of the purpose, contents, etc. of police activities, office work, etc. related to the food expenses expenditure and individual information, and those that do not correspond to non-public information Publish.

(4) Matters concerning investigation costs

Regarding the budget execution related documents regarding the expenditure of investigation expenses, in addition to the third item of this standard (information on public safety, etc.), the following shall apply.
A. In principle, individual executions will not be disclosed because the investigative cooperators such as informants may be identified and harmed, or future cooperation may not be obtained.
B. The amount of expenditure by affiliation by year will be disclosed.