The State Secrets Law was enacted in 1988 and made effective May 1989. The State Secrecy Bureau started amending the law as early as 1995, but it was not until 2007 that the amendment draft was submitted to the Legislative Affairs Office of the State Council. The draft then went through a brainstorming session mainly carried out within the bureaucracy.

     

Since the passage of the Open Government Information Regulations (hereafter OGI Regulations) last year, tensions between the State Secrets Law and OGI Regulations have been raised, due to contradictions in the definitions of confidential information as well as vagueness in the standards of classification. For example, while fiscal information is stipulated in the State Secrets Law as confidential information, it is a type of information that the government should disclose according to OGI Regulation. Hence, public appeal for the modification of the State Secrets Law ensued in the hope that a new bill would help finally demarcate public information and classified information, eliminating the obstacle for instituting open government and the right of information.

     

To the public's disappointment, official sources indicated that the amendment draft of the State Secrets Law took the opposite direction—emphasis on strengthening the protection of confidential information. The draft added additional protection measures to the secret system, measures to improve management of secret agencies, bureaus and personnel and other institutional modifications. It also tries to specify the legal liability of violation.

 

According to an insider, national security and interest is priority; protection is the rule, disclosure is the exception.

     

There is some progress worth noting though. Data on casualties caused by natural catastrophes will no longer belong to classified information, for example. More importantly, the amendment draft of the State Secrets Law initiates a quantification process. As a result, not only will the pertaining bureaus be equipped with scientific standards to categorize information, but the public can refer to them in a process of legal recourse.

     

To provide citizen's certain leverage of judicial relief, Guo Jie, vice inspector of the National State Secrets Bureau, proposes that also under microscope should be abusive uses of information protection by the government that incur citizens' loss.

     

In an interview with Beijing Sci-Tech Weekly, Wang Xiumei, a Law School professor at Beijing Normal University, contends that what state secrets and right of information share is the principle of national and public interest. Whether a piece of information should be released or not depends on what would best protect national security and public interests. Universalizing the concept of national security and interest, therefore, does no good in protecting national interest, and unnecessary classification will impede the public's right of information.

     

Professor Wang also draws our attention to the experience of the American government, saying that scientific classification and protection of national interests should be under constant modification in accordance to reality.

     

Liang Ping, a journalist of Shandong News, postulates that the real obstacle to open government is not the State Secrets Law but the degree of commitment made by governments at all levels.

     

In the meantime a valuable legal discourse is taking place behind the scene. Many law experts have pointed out that OGI Regulations contain no comparable legal effect versus the State Secrets Law. The latter, according to the principle of unity of the legal system, is given priority over the former.

     

Facing OGIR's disadvantaged position, Xiong Wenzhao, a professor at Minzu University of China, raises an alternative of integrating the State Secrets Law with OGI Regulations so as to have a unified law that governs government information. Another proposed solution is to develop an Access to Information Law as other countries have been working on.

     

Starting in the late 1970s, a new wave of right to information emerged on the horizon. Today, numerous countries in the world have passed acts and laws pertaining to this issue and in certain areas, a new round of reform has been set forth. A recent example is the Obama administration's open government initiative, which just entered its second phase as planned. China's recent move has demonstrated its commitment to guarantee citizens' basic right to information. Cautious and firm steps have been observed, yet we should note that China has embarked on a long journey. An accurate prediction is yet to be reached. At this stage, what we can say for sure is that the amendment proposal will definitely set the tone for China's OGI in the near future.