Timing Amendment to Security Council Disclosure

Comfed

Comfed

Minister
-
-
-
Pronouns
he/him
TNP Nation
Comfed
Discord
comfed
Section 5.5 of the Legal Code shall be amended to read:
Section 5.5 Disclosure of Security Council Information
26. Private Security Council records that reach one year of age will be relocated to the appropriate Declassified Archive visible to residents.
27. Information eligible for declassification will be reviewed by the Vice Delegate and the Security Council. The review will redact any information that fits any of the below definitions:
  • Real-life information about any NationStates player from which there is a risk of inferring that player's real-life identity and which has not willingly been disclosed to the public, including, but not limited to, an individual's name, IP address, physical address or location, phone number, place of employment or education, appearance, social media accounts, and other knowledge about a player, unless the player in question provides explicit consent for this information not to be considered private.
  • Real-life information about any NationStates player for which there exists a reasonable real-life expectation of privacy or discretion, including, but not limited to, health status, both mental and physical; financial status; personal tragedies; changes in personal status such as marriage, divorce, pregnancy, birth, or death; and other similar information, unless the player in question provides explicit consent for this information not to be considered private.
  • Information that, upon being made public, would jeopardize any ongoing military or intelligence operations; or jeopardize the security of units and agents participating in them, or be harmful to the diplomatic interests, military interests, or security of The North Pacific.
  • Information that, upon being made public, would jeopardize Security Council operations in response to threats and attempted coups.
  • Comments made by previous members of the Security Council who are not able to consent to their comments being made public.
28. At any time a citizen may request the release of any private record from the Security Council through the Vice Delegate.
29. The Vice Delegate will retrieve the information and present it for a review to the Security Council. The Security Council will review the compiled information for any information that should be deemed classified and redact said information.
30. The Vice Delegate will present the requested information, including indicators of redacted information.
31. Residents who do not receive this information for any reason not specifically designated in any laws or regulations or information they feel may have been redacted incorrectly may file a request for review from the Court, where the Vice Delegate may present evidence that addresses any claim that the release of the information meets one or more of the acceptable criteria for classification. This evidence does not need to include the redacted information itself, simply evidence as to why the information should remain redacted.
32. Information appropriately not disclosed will be accepted as classified by a two-thirds vote of the Court sitting as a three-member panel.
Click to expand...
Section 5.5 Disclosure of Security Council Information
26. Private Security Council records that reach one year of age will be relocated to the appropriate Declassified Archive visible to residents.
27. Information eligible for declassification will be reviewed by the Vice Delegate and the Security Council. The review will redact any information that fits any of the below definitions:
  • Real-life information about any NationStates player from which there is a risk of inferring that player's real-life identity and which has not willingly been disclosed to the public, including, but not limited to, an individual's name, IP address, physical address or location, phone number, place of employment or education, appearance, social media accounts, and other knowledge about a player, unless the player in question provides explicit consent for this information not to be considered private.
  • Real-life information about any NationStates player for which there exists a reasonable real-life expectation of privacy or discretion, including, but not limited to, health status, both mental and physical; financial status; personal tragedies; changes in personal status such as marriage, divorce, pregnancy, birth, or death; and other similar information, unless the player in question provides explicit consent for this information not to be considered private.
  • Information that, upon being made public, would jeopardize any ongoing military or intelligence operations; or jeopardize the security of units and agents participating in them, or be harmful to the diplomatic interests, military interests, or security of The North Pacific.
  • Information that, upon being made public, would jeopardize Security Council operations in response to threats and attempted coups.
  • Comments made by previous members of the Security Council who are not able to consent to their comments being made public.
28. At any time a citizen may request the release of any private record from the Security Council through the Vice Delegate.
29. The Vice Delegate will retrieve the information and present it for a review to the Security Council. The Security Council will have 14 days to review the compiled information for any information that should be deemed classified and redact said information. Once the 14 days has elapsed, the information requested will be presented as is, with the exception of Real-life information.
30. The Vice Delegate will present the requested information, including indicators of redacted information.
31. Residents who do not receive this information for any reason not specifically designated in any laws or regulations or information they feel may have been redacted incorrectly may file a request for review from the Court, where the Vice Delegate may present evidence that addresses any claim that the release of the information meets one or more of the acceptable criteria for classification. This evidence does not need to include the redacted information itself, simply evidence as to why the information should remain redacted.
32. Information appropriately not disclosed will be accepted as classified by a two-thirds vote of the Court sitting as a three-member panel.

What is this?
This bill will, if passed remove the 14-day time limit for the SC to review the records.

Why?
Because, in short, there are a lot of old classified SC threads. The SC has been in existence since 2005. FOIA does not impose a timeline for the declassification of records and neither should this.
 
Comfed:
Because, in short, there are a lot of old classified SC threads. The SC has been in existence since 2005. FOIA does not impose a timeline for the declassification of records and neither should this.
Click to expand...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the 14-day deadline seems to apply only that actively requested information, not all the information the VD is currently working on declassifying.
 
saintpeter:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the 14-day deadline seems to apply only that actively requested information, not all the information the VD is currently working on declassifying.
Click to expand...
You're not wrong - the point of this is for residents to be able to requests lots of logs without putting the VD ans Security Council under undue pressure.
 
Under what circumstances would someone need to request so many logs that the VD and SC would be placed "under undue pressure" under the current system?
 
I am opposed to this proposal.

As indicated, it is not apparent that it applies to the current disclosure exercise the Security Council is undertaking, which is the matter it is most relevant to. Once that is completed, the rolling disclosure of year old records within fourteen days should not place an undue burden on the Security Council even if the time limit does apply to it, so the problem this proposal would address is a one-off issue.

In terms of records specifically requested, I don’t see any good reason to say fourteen days is not enough. If the current practice in relation to FOIA requests from the Delegate and requests from the Court are anything to go by, specific requests to the Security Council will be rare and limited in scope, such that fourteen days should be more than sufficient.

Moreover, the proposal that became section 5.5 was drawn up by the then Vice Delegate, who is also an ordinary member of the Security Council, and, by my count, was supported by a majority of the Security Council at vote and another member, though they did not vote, expressed support of it in the debate. Only one member of the Security Council voted against it. Plainly, the Security Council did not think that the fourteen day limit was a concern.
 
Unless you're requesting hundreds of logs, I don't see how the existing system places an undue burden on the VD and SC. Against as is.
 
As I read the current law, the 14 days applies to requests for information less than one year old. I do not have an issue with that bit. The part that is daunting is going through all the old stuff for declassification. So I'm not sure the bill does what it is intending to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top