Abstract

The purpose of this study is to guarantee the citizen's right to request information disclosure by illuminating the actual situation of illegal or unreasonable disclosure of information by police agencies that perform the duties of maintaining public peace and order. This study examines the information disclosure procedures of public institutions and administrative judgment, which is a means of dissatisfaction with police dispositions, and examines the actual status of illegal or unjust information disclosure dispositions by police agencies through the analysis of 22 rulings of the Administrative Appeals Commission. Policy suggestions were made after reviewing the implications. When a citizen who is guaranteed the right to know requests information disclosure to the police agency, the police agency and the person in charge of information disclosure must comply with the information disclosure procedures and methods in accordance with the law and decide whether or not to disclose information. If a person requesting information disclosure is dissatisfied with the disposition of information disclosure by the police agency, he/she may request an administrative adjudication to the Administrative Appeals Commission. The Administrative Appeals Commission, which received the request for administrative adjudication, reviews and decides on the illegality or injustice of the information disclosure disposition of the police agency. In 2021, the Central Administrative Appeals Commission ruled citing or partially citing 22 cases regarding illegal or unreasonable police agency information disclosure dispositions. The implications derived from this analysis are as follows. First, there is a misunderstanding in the application of legal principles of information disclosure laws as some police agencies are refusing to disclose information by ‘without revealing specific reasons for non-disclosure’ or ‘misjudging information subject to disclosure or disclosure’. In addition, some information disclosure managers of police agencies did not comply with the procedures set forth in the Information Disclosure Act and violated them. In addition, some insufficient matters were confirmed in the management of re-disposal according to the purpose of the administrative ruling adjudication of the police agency. Based on the matters reviewed above, the proposals for the disposition of information disclosure by police agencies can be summarized as follows. First, it is necessary to collect and analyze cases of illegal and unfair rulings by police agencies every year, to produce a casebook of administrative judgment rulings on police information disclosure, and to prepare a system for regular education. Second, it is necessary to examine whether disciplinary responsibility exists for those who have violated the duty of good faith or the duty to comply with the law, which was revealed through the ruling by the Administrative Appeals Commission citing the disposition of illegal or unreasonable information disclosure by the police agency. Third, it is necessary to establish a management and supervision system that can fulfill the duty of redistribution stipulated by law according to the purpose of the ruling specified in the disposition of illegal or unreasonable information disclosure by the police agency.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call