Example 1
Judge's Tip: Consult ≠ government information
According to Article 2 of the Regulations on the Openness of Government Information, government information should be recorded or saved in a certain form. Furthermore, it can be understood from two points: first, government information should have certain carriers, such as documents and electronic data; Second, government information should be pre-existing, not need to be processed or produced. In this case, the Urban Management and Law Enforcement Bureau seized Ye's desk, but this seizure is an administrative compulsory measure, and it is not necessary to make and save government information about its factual basis and legal basis. Yemou's request for disclosure of the "factual basis and legal basis for searching the dining table downstairs" is essentially to question the law enforcement behavior of the Urban Management Law Enforcement Bureau in the form of consultation. In this case, it is suggested that Yemou directly file an administrative lawsuit against the seizure of the Urban Management Enforcement Bureau, or file an administrative reconsideration with the district government where the Urban Management Supervision Bureau is located or the Beijing Urban Management Enforcement Bureau.
Example 2
Due to a dispute with Li, Li will be injured and identified as a minor injury by forensic doctors. The Public Security Bureau put Li's beating case on file for investigation as a criminal case. However, due to the difficulty in obtaining evidence, the decision to file a case has not yet been made. He thought that the Public Security Bureau was protecting Li and strongly demanded that the case be filed as soon as possible. So he applied to the Public Security Bureau for information disclosure and asked the Public Security Bureau to disclose the decision to file a case.
Judge's tip: criminal investigation information ≠ government information
Similarly, according to Article 2 of the Regulations on the Openness of Government Information, government information should be information produced or kept by administrative organs. Public security organs have both administrative and criminal investigation functions. Public security organs belong to judicial organs, not administrative organs, when performing criminal investigation functions. In this case, the information that Chen Mou applied for disclosure actually belongs to criminal investigation information, not government information. It is suggested that Chen Mou file a case with the supervision department of the Public Security Bureau and the people's procuratorate for supervision. Those who meet the conditions for private prosecution may directly file a criminal private prosecution with the people's court.
Example 3
Xiaoding believed that a town government cadre had dereliction of duty in the process of performing his duties, so he reported it to a district supervision bureau, demanding administrative accountability, and got a quick reply. In order to further strengthen supervision, he also applied to the District Supervision Bureau for the disclosure of government information, requesting the disclosure of the Audit and Supervision Plan for the Departure of Cadres in a District.
Judge's Tip: Internal Information ≠ Government Information
Government information should be the information produced by administrative organs in the process of exercising their administrative duties. It should be noted that not all government actions are external actions, and some government actions only have internal effects. A typical example is supervision behavior. Supervision is an internal supervision behavior carried out by the government in order to improve work efficiency and strengthen the construction of a clean government. Specialized supervisory organs exercise supervisory duties, and their role is to evaluate the rewards and punishments of administrative organs and their staff, but they have no external effect. The Audit Supervision Scheme that Xiaoding requested to be made public belongs to the internal information generated by the supervisory organ's internal exercise of supervisory duties, not the information generated by the external exercise of administrative duties, so it does not belong to government information.
Example 4
Kobayashi is a public welfare person who is enthusiastic about environmental protection. Although I am in Beijing, I am worried about the environmental pollution in my hometown, especially the river pollution. Therefore, on the occasion of returning to his hometown during the Spring Festival, he applied to the county environmental protection bureau in his hometown for government information disclosure, demanding the disclosure of the county's "list of enterprises that discharge industrial sewage into rivers beyond the standard" to urge the government to strengthen environmental protection.
Judge's Tip: Need to "process" information ≠ government information
Kobayashi's spirit of caring for public welfare is commendable, but his practice cannot be supported by law. As mentioned above, government information should be pre-existing, not information that needs to be processed. Although the Environmental Protection Bureau has the obligation to inspect and supervise enterprises that discharge industrial sewage beyond the standard, it is not the obligation of the Environmental Protection Bureau to draw up and keep a list of such enterprises, because the excessive discharge of enterprises is a dynamic process and it is impossible to master them all. It is undoubtedly useless to make a list.
If Kobayashi wants to produce the list, the Environmental Protection Bureau must process, make, analyze and summarize it, which is obviously beyond the scope of government information disclosure. It is suggested that Xiaolin report directly to the environmental protection department, or even to the superior environmental protection department, in order to achieve his own public welfare purpose.
Example 5
Chen Mou is a villager in a village. At the beginning of this year, the village committee held a meeting of villagers' representatives, and the meeting decided to adjust the village collective land, requiring some villagers, including Chen Mou, who mostly occupied multi-purpose collective land to vacate their land. Chen Mou refused to accept that the procedure of the villagers' representative meeting organized by the village committee was illegal and was manipulated by individual personnel, and asked the township government to correct it. In order to prove his claim, Chen Mou applied to the township government for disclosure of government information, demanding disclosure of "minutes of villagers' representative meetings".
Judge's tip: village information ≠ government information
Chen Mou confused the difference between village information and government information. Village information refers to the information generated in villagers' self-government activities, such as the financial expenditure of village committees and land contracting. Villagers' autonomy is practiced in China, and village collectives are autonomous organizations rather than first-level governments. Therefore, the village affairs information generated in villagers' self-government activities does not belong to the category of government information. However, it is worth reminding that if there is evidence in Chen Mou that the township government has obtained the minutes of the villagers' representative meeting in the process of performing its administrative duties, then the township government still has the obligation of publicity.
Example 6
Wu Mou's father, Mr Wu Lao, is a famous collector of calligraphy and painting. During the Cultural Revolution, Mr. Wu was wrongly criticized and his collection of calligraphy and painting was confiscated. After the Cultural Revolution, Mr. Wu was rehabilitated and some of his calligraphy and paintings were returned, but some of them were still lost. Before he died, Mr. Wu asked to do his best to find it. Because of the long time, Wu Mou couldn't find it, so he put forward the disclosure of government information to a municipal cultural relics bureau, asking for a list of calligraphy and painting seized in that year. The Cultural Relics Bureau informed Wu Mou that the list had been handed over to the archives.
Judge's prompt: hand over file information ≠ government information.
Since the founding of New China, China has gradually established a relatively complete archival work system, and 1987 specially formulated the Archives Law. The Archives Law stipulates that state organs shall hand over archives to archives regularly. All files handed over to the archives shall be open to the public within the time limit stipulated in the Archives Law. The public can consult and use open files. Therefore, the transfer of archives by the Cultural Relics Bureau conforms to the provisions of the Archives Law, and there is nothing improper. After the handover, the checklist belongs to historical archives and no longer belongs to the category of government information. Therefore, it is difficult to get legal support for Wu Mou government's request for information disclosure. It is suggested to apply to the archives for utilization in accordance with the provisions of the Archives Law.