Cookie Consent by Free Privacy Policy Generator

Iceland – (C6) Practice of access to information

Score in short:

Public information is accessible by law, but not always in reality. Journalists often must spend time and effort to get access.

Score in detail:

The Media Act (no. 38/2011) does not cover access to public information per se, except for touching upon the media’s part in securing the public’s right to information in Iceland (Parliament, 2011). The Information Act (no. 140/2012; see Parliament, 2012) and the Administrative Procedures Act (no. 37/1993; see Parliament, 1993) cover the media as well as the public’s right to information, so it was not considered necessary to address it in the Media Act. Journalists have no special privileges on paper, but the media’s important role in information gathering and publishing is acknowledged and upheld in laws.

The Information Act was first passed in 1996, but has been amended several times; most significantly in 2012 and 2019. From the start, this law was passed to secure as much right to public information as possible, with the then prime minister wording a strong message that its content was aimed at ensuring all exceptions were to be interpreted narrowly. This meant that all concessions for doubt would be interpreted in favour of the public. Soon, however, there was criticism, especially by the media, on how many exceptions there were in the law and of (some) governmental bodies being excessively protective of information. Even so, the law covered a long-awaited ground in many cases: when governmental departments, institutions, and publicly owned companies refused to hand out or give access to public information (documents and other information), inquirers could submit an appeal to the Information Ruling Committee (IRC) (Government of Iceland, n.d.).

Criticism continued over the next few years, but it was not until after the 2008 financial crisis that pressure was really put on authorities to amend the law significantly. The media and people with financial interests began to demand access to documents pertaining to the crisis, but the law did not support this surge. And indeed, the left-wing government of 2009 to 2013 began work on a new law with significant increase of access and more beneficial procedures. There were four key changes: 1) the older strict demand to name exactly all documents sought after was eased; 2) the number and types of authorities the law covered was increased (adding government-owned companies, 51% and over); 3) provisions were made to shorten the time rulings took; and 4) there was a clause ordering state and municipal governmental bodies to start the construction of registers of all cases and documents, to be available online. The amendments came into effect in 2013. The 2019 changes added the legislative and the judiciary branches to the “pool” and an “advisor” position was founded to advise the public on procedures and public officials on how to deal with inquiries. Moreover, provisions were made to bring about speedier resolutions by the IRC (with a 150-day limit, as a stepping stone, down eventually to 90 days).

IRC reports have not always specifically stated when cases originate from the media or others (rulings are published with complainant nameless), but increasingly, this has been mentioned and covered in rulings and statistics. Reports show fluctuations in the number of complaints, and in recent years, overall rulings have varied from 21 (2008) up to 74 (2012), and there has been an increase in time that does not help attempts to shorten the time it takes IRC to rule on complaints.

The journalists interviewed stated that access to information had definitely improved in Iceland in recent years; there used to be more reluctance to hand over information, but now the law is much better and journalists can usually get the information they need. It was stated, however, that this could be a very long process, particularly if the IRC needs to be involved. There is sometimes reluctance to hand over information, so journalists sometimes need to spend time and effort to access it. In order to exercise the watchdog function, journalists need unrestricted access to public information. This access is certainly not “unrestricted” in Iceland, but the information law in most cases secures that journalists get important information.