Administration rejects group's plan for draft HK archive law
An advocacy group formed by archivists and retired judges has drafted an archives law for Hong Kong, but the administration has given it the cold shoulder.
At a seminar that was its first public activity yesterday, the Archives Action Group appealed to the audience to support what it called a law for 'documentary heritage', pointing out most jurisdictions in the world, including the mainland, Macau, Taiwan, Singapore and Japan, had such a law and Hong Kong was the rare exception.
'This is an appalling situation. Officials are either too lazy or timid to make one,' said retired High Court judge William Waung Sik-ying, a committee member of the action group.
Waung said the group had approached Chief Secretary Henry Tang Ying-yen, but Tang's office only gave them a reply that an archive law was low on the government's priority and that existing non-binding administrative rules were effective.
The group - formed in 2008 by former Government Records Service Directors Simon Chu Fook-keung and Don Brech, lawmaker Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee, retired district judge Chua Fi-lan, Waung, and university and business archivists - completed the draft law in March this year, based on measures used in Britain, the United States, Australia and other countries.
The bill calls for the establishment of a statutory body with power to formulate records policy and headed by a professional archivist.
It would empower the archivist to acquire records from all government and statutory bodies and to nominate them as public archives.
These would be made available for public access after 20 years.
Exceptions to the 20-year rule would be granted for reasons including national security, public interest, protection of a person's constitutional right or trade secrets.
Such closed files should be reviewed for declassification.
An advisory council would determine whether continued closure was justified for such secret files and the council's decisions could be appealed.
The bill also proposed that any public officer who failed to create or manage public records properly would face a maximum penalty of HK$100,000 or 12 months in jail, and that those who destroyed public records would face double the penalty.
It would also be an offence to deny access to public records.
Margaret Ng, of the Civic Party, said the bill was intended as a reference for the government and that she would propose it to Legco if officials did not.
'Now that documents are digitised, it is even more important to keep the e-records properly, since they can be so easily deleted,' she said.
At present, the absence of an archive law leaves it up to bureaus and departments whether or not they transfer documents to the Government Records Service (GRS), which oversees management of public records.
Earlier, the Post found that since 1997 the Chief Executive's Office, the Chief Secretary's Office and the Financial Secretary's Office had not transferred their records to the GRS because of 'operational needs'.
The GRS had also been slow in opening classified records, which are supposed to be opened for review after 30 years.
The agency opened only 485 out of 2,561 government records due for annual review between 2004 and 2009.
A spokeswoman for the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau, which oversees the GRS, said the current arrangements were working well.
'We are aware of the position of the Archives Action Group and will continue to exchange views with it with a view to further improving the management of government and archival records,' she said.
Slow revelation
Classified records are supposed to be opened for review after 30 years
Out of 2,561 government records due for annual review between 2004 and 2009 the government only opened: 485
