Freedom of Information in Mexico: Not So Free

The Freedom of Information Act in Mexico—also known as FOIA—provides a process for citizens to gain access to information about the way their society is working. Ideally, these requests are fulfilled without regard to the political power of the person making them, and thereby serve to increase transparency in governance. Conversely, a breakdown in the FOIA process can be indicative of inefficiency or of larger issues of corruption. In a paper published in August 2017 by the Inter-American Development Bank, Paul Lagunes and Oscar Pocasangre Meneses evaluated the efficacy of Mexico’s treatment of FOIA requests as a possible indicator of systemic malfeasance.

The researchers made 307 FOIA requests to 197 entities of the Mexican government in 2007, 2013 and 2015. The requests each contained the same 13 questions, ten of which pertained to data that should be provided to citizens by law. The other three questions were more personal in nature, testing the aspect of Mexico’s FOIA that encourages public officials to make their assets and potential conflicts of interest public. The aim of the last three questions was to test officials’ commitment to full disclosure, even when the law does not strictly obligate them to provide that information.

These requests were made on behalf of male citizens whose names carried no political affiliations or degree of celebrity. In 2007, 87 additional requests were made on behalf of citizens who were wealthy and/or had political influence. The researchers found that the replies to the requests from both types—the average men and the men with “clout”—were largely the same in terms of timeliness and content, but the influential citizens were more likely to be charged a fee for their requests than the average citizens.

Overall, requests were rarely ignored, and the rate at which a response was given—regardless of whether it provided the information or denied the request—rose by slightly over ten percent over the course of the time period during which the study was conducted. However, the likelihood of a response that provided the requested information was low, with 62 percent of the requests for copies of state contracts—which the government is specifically obligated to provide—being denied. Over time, the rate at which state entities requested a fee in order to gain access to information they were legally required to provide doubled, likely as a method of deterrence. Additionally, the average wait time for a response increased, possibly due to an increase in the number of FOIA requests being made.

Ultimately, the study found that Mexico’s Freedom of Information Act is, at face-value, working. Citizens are likely to receive a response to a request for information, regardless of their political power. However, the system is facing serious challenges. The rate at which information is provided should increase if it hopes to meet international standards, particularly in cases when the requested information must be made public by law. Additionally, the rising trend of using fees as a barrier is cause for concern. The concept of FOIA does not retain any social or public value if the information is ensconced behind a pay wall. These setbacks speak to larger issues of transparency that the Mexican government is currently contending with as it makes progress toward increased government accountability.

Article source: “Dynamic Transparency: An Audit of Mexico’s Freedom of Information Act.” Lagunes, Paul and Oscar Pocasangre M. IBD Working Paper Series, August 2017.

Featured photo: cc/(KoliadzynskaIryna, photo ID: 636735018, from iStock by Getty Images)