Not exact matches
You alluded to the fact that the Constitution has stated limits, I beg to differ, the Constitution just said
in Art 21 (1)(f) «
information subject to such QUALIFICATIONS AND LAWS as are necessary for a
democratic society».
The Ghana Center for
Democratic Development (CDD),
in partnership with the Civil
Society Platform on the Sustainable Development Goals, has led a nationwide consultative process with state and non-state actors targeted at harmonizing all relevant
information on the Sustainable Development Goals
in the country.
«An act to provide for the implementation of the constitutional rights to
information held by a public institution subject to the exemptions that are necessary and consistent with the protection of the public interest
in a
democratic society to foster a culture of transparency and accountability
in public affairs and to provide for related matters», the Deputy Attorney General submitted.
It shows its preference for the more flexible common law «reasonable expectation of privacy» rule, which defines what (
information) is and is not amenable to privacy protection based on what ought to be expected
in a
democratic society and
in the full factual context.
«the Court observed that while an open and
democratic society requires access to
information in the hands of public bodies, it must also offer protection for some of that
information «
in order to prevent the impairment of those very principles and promote good governance»» (at para. 9).
A primary factor to consider under any privacy rubric is the nature of the
information obtained and the extent to which it falls within the «biographical core of personal
information which individuals
in a free and
democratic society would wish to maintain and control from dissemination to the state.»
Second,
in Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers, the Court of Appeal reiterated that under HRA 1998 the public interest test has changed from the need to show exceptional circumstances which require disclosure of the
information to a test of whether a fetter on the right of freedom of expression is «necessary
in a
democratic society» (para 67).