Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Restrictions on Access to Information

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Right of Access to Public Information

  • 522 Accesses

Abstract

The legal treatment of the restrictions on access to information, according to the articles of the Brazilian Law Nº 12.527/2011, is analyzed in this chapter. Although this study concerns positive law, it does a critical analysis over the options adopted by the Legislative Power, as well as it proceeds to the interpretation of the provisions given by the Brazilian Constitution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Mota Junior 2012, p. 21.

  2. 2.

    Bulos 2012, p. 198.

  3. 3.

    See Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Gomes Lund and Others (Guerrilha do Araguaia) v. Brazil (Judgment of 24 November 2010), Series C, No. 219, para 229. http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_219_ing.pdf (Accessed on 12 January 2017).

  4. 4.

    Alves 2012, p. 130.

  5. 5.

    Michener 2011, p. 7.

  6. 6.

    Article 19 1999, p. 3; Mendel 2008, p. 30.

  7. 7.

    See Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Gomes Lund and Others (Guerrilha do Araguaia) v. Brazil (Judgment of 24 November 2010), Series C, No. 219, para 229. http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_219_ing.pdf (Accessed on 12 January 2017).

  8. 8.

    Cademartori & Cademartori 2011b, p. 336.

  9. 9.

    Cademartori & Cademartori 2011b, p. 339.

  10. 10.

    Cademartori & Cademartori 2011b, p. 339.

  11. 11.

    See Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Gomes Lund and Others (Guerrilha do Araguaia) v. Brazil (Judgment of 24 November 2010), Series C, No. 219, para 229. http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_219_ing.pdf (Accessed on 12 January 2017). The Court decided that restrictions must respond to an objective displayed in Article 13.2 of the American Convention, “the respect for the rights and reputation of others” or “the protection of national security, public order, or public health, or morals”.

  12. 12.

    See the following Resolutions of the General Assembly of the Organization of American States: AG/RES. 2057 (2004); AG/RES. 2121 (2005); AG/RES. 2252 (2006); AG/RES. 2288 (2007); AG/RES. 2418 (2008); AG/RES. 2514 (2009). http://www.oas.org/ (Accessed on 12 January 2017).

  13. 13.

    See Organization of American States. General Assembly. Model Inter-American Law on Access to Information (2010). AG/RES. 2607. Appendix. XL-O/10. Washington D.C.: OAS. http://www.oas.org/ (Accessed on 12 January 2017).

  14. 14.

    Mendel 2008, p. 34.

  15. 15.

    Cademartori & Cademartori 2011a, p. 11.256.

  16. 16.

    Mendel 2008, p. 150.

  17. 17.

    Tourinho 2009, p. 74.

  18. 18.

    Levy 2009, p. 1.

  19. 19.

    Michener 2011, p. 9; Article 19 1999, p. 8.

  20. 20.

    Mendel 2008, p. 150.

  21. 21.

    Tourinho 2009, p. 73.

  22. 22.

    Tourinho, 2009, p. 74.

  23. 23.

    Alves 2012, p. 131.

  24. 24.

    Supreme Federal Court (Supremo Tribunal Federal), Second regulatory appeal in mandamus suspension 3,902 São Paulo (Judgment of 9 June 2011).

  25. 25.

    See Organization of American States. General Assembly. Model Inter-American Law on Access to Information (2010). AG/RES. 2607. Appendix. XL-O/10. Washington D.C.: OAS. http://www.oas.org/ (Accessed on 12 January 2017).

  26. 26.

    Supreme Federal Court (Supremo Tribunal Federal), Extraordinary appeal 673,707 Minas Gerais (Judgment of 17 June 2015).

  27. 27.

    Mota Junior 2012, p. 25.

  28. 28.

    Fregapani & Botelho 2012, p. 18.

  29. 29.

    Superior Court of Justice (Superior Tribunal de Justiça), Writ of mandamus 19,243-DF (Judgment of 11 September 2013).

  30. 30.

    Cademartori & Cademartori 2011a, p. 11.262–11.263.

  31. 31.

    See Organization of American States. General Assembly. Model Inter-American Law on Access to Information (2010). AG/RES. 2607. Appendix. XL-O/10. Washington D.C.: OAS. http://www.oas.org/ (Accessed on 12 January 2017).

  32. 32.

    Mota Junior 2012, p. 24.

  33. 33.

    Mendel 2008, p. 36.

  34. 34.

    Tourinho 2009, p. 75.

  35. 35.

    Cademartori & Cademartori 2011a, p. 11.255.

  36. 36.

    Mendel 2008, p. 30, 35; Article 19 1999, p. 7.

  37. 37.

    Tourinho 2009, p. 71.

  38. 38.

    Barros 2003, p. 76.

  39. 39.

    Superior Court of Justice (Superior Tribunal de Justiça), Writ of mandamus 20,196-DF (Judgment of 8 October 2014).

  40. 40.

    See Organization of American States. General Assembly. Model Inter-American Law on Access to Information (2010). AG/RES. 2607. Appendix. XL-O/10. Washington D.C.: OAS. http://www.oas.org/ (Accessed on 12 January 2017).

  41. 41.

    Levy 2009, p. 12.

  42. 42.

    See Organization of American States. General Assembly. Model Inter-American Law on Access to Information (2010). AG/RES. 2607. Appendix. XL-O/10. Washington D.C.: OAS. http://www.oas.org/en/sla/dil/docs/access_to_information_Text_edited_DDI.pdf (Accessed on 2 May 2017).

  43. 43.

    Levy 2009, p. 14.

  44. 44.

    Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Claude Reyes et al. v. Chile (Judgment of 19 September 2006), Series C, No. 151, para 77. http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_151_ing.pdf (Accessed on 12 January 2017).

  45. 45.

    Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Barrios Altos v. Peru (Judgment of 14 March 2001), Series C, No. 75, para 48. http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_75_ing.pdf (Accessed on 12 January 2017).

  46. 46.

    See Presidency of the Federative Republic of Brazil, Message 523/2011. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2011/Msg/VEP-523.htm. Accessed on 12 January 2017.

References

  • Alves, M. S. D. (2012). Do sigilo ao acesso: análise tópica da mudança de cultura. Revista do Tribunal de Contas do Estado de Minas Gerais, 30, Edição Especial (Transparência e Controle Social), 120–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Article 19. (1999). O direito do público a estar informado: princípios sobre a legislação de liberdade de informação. London: Article 19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barros, L. V. (2003). A proteção legal do acesso a informações sobre atividades causadoras de impactos ambientais. Boletim científico da Escola Superior do Ministério Público da União, 3(10), 73–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulos, U. L. (2012). Constituição federal anotada. São Paulo, Brazil: Saraiva.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cademartori, D. M. L., & Cademartori, S. U. (2011a). O direito fundamental de acesso no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro. In Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação em Direito (Ed.), Anais do XX Congresso Nacional do CONPEDI (pp. 11.251–11.277). Florianópolis, Brazil: Fundação Boiteux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cademartori, S. U., & Cademartori, D. M. L. (2011b). O poder do segredo e os segredos do poder: uma análise histórico-conceitual dos limites e possibilidades de convivência entre o segredo e a democracia. Novos estudos jurídicos, 16(3), 329–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fregapani, G. A. F., & Botelho, A. C. M. P. (2012). A lei de acesso à informação e sua regulamentação no âmbito do TCU. Revista consulex: ciência jurídica em foco, 16(376), 16–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, J. L. (2009). Das restrições ao pedido de informações a órgão público. Rede: Revista Eletrônica de Direito do Estado, 5(17.) Retrieved January 12, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2c0BEAC.

  • Mendel, T. (2008). Freedom of information: A comparative legal survey. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michener, G. (2011). Liberdade de informação: uma síntese dos dilemas de conformidade e suas possíveis soluções. In Article 19 (Ed.), Leis de acesso à informação: dilemas da implementação (pp. 7–23). London: Article 19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mota Junior, J. F. (2012). A nova lei de acesso à informação e o fomento à gestão democrática da educação. Reflexão, ações e educação: revista de ciências sociais e humanas, 1(1), 12–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organization of American States. General Assembly. (2010). Model Inter-American Law on Access to Information. AG/RES. 2607. Appendix. XL-O/10. Washington, DC: OAS. Retrieved January 12, 2017, from http://www.oas.org/

  • Presidency of the Federative Republic of Brazil. (2011). Message n° 523/2011. Retrieved January 12, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2c2Owqv

  • Tourinho, R. (2009). Do direito à informação e a prerrogativa pública do sigilo: análise crítica do Projeto de Lei n° 5.228/09. Interesse público, 9(57), 59–76.

    Google Scholar 

List of Cases

    Inter-American Court of Human Rights

    • Inter-American Court of Human Rights 14.03.2001, Barrios Altos v. Peru, Series C, No. 75.

      Google Scholar 

    • Inter-American Court of Human Rights 19.06.2006, Claude Reyes, et al. v. Chile, Series C, No. 151.

      Google Scholar 

    • Inter-American Court of Human Rights 24.11.2010, Gomes Lund and Others (Guerrilha do Araguaia v. Brazil), Series C, No. 219.

      Google Scholar 

    Brazilian Courts

    • Supreme Federal Court (Supremo Tribunal Federal) 09.06.2011, Second regulatory appeal in mandamus suspension 3,902 São Paulo.

      Google Scholar 

    • Superior Court of Justice (Superior Tribunal de Justiça) 11.09.2013, Writ of mandamus 19,243-DF.

      Google Scholar 

    • Superior Court of Justice 08.10.2014, Writ of mandamus 20,196-DF.

      Google Scholar 

    • Supreme Federal Court 17.06.2015, Extraordinary appeal 673,707 Minas.

      Google Scholar 

    Download references

    Author information

    Authors and Affiliations

    1. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito, Federal University of Ceará, Fortaleza, Brazil

      Germana de Oliveira Moraes & Álisson José Maia Melo

    Authors
    1. Germana de Oliveira Moraes
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    2. Álisson José Maia Melo
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Corresponding author

    Correspondence to Germana de Oliveira Moraes .

    Editor information

    Editors and Affiliations

    1. Faculty for Economics, Law and Social Science, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany

      Hermann-Josef Blanke

    2. School of Law, Fluminense Federal University, Niterói, Brazil

      Ricardo Perlingeiro

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    Copyright information

    © 2018 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature

    About this chapter

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this chapter

    de Oliveira Moraes, G., Melo, Á.J.M. (2018). Restrictions on Access to Information. In: Blanke, HJ., Perlingeiro, R. (eds) The Right of Access to Public Information. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-55554-5_17

    Download citation

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-55554-5_17

    • Published:

    • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

    • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-55552-1

    • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-55554-5

    • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

    Publish with us

    Policies and ethics

    Search

    Navigation