A coalition of journalism and civil society organizations joined forces Tuesday to denounce Senate Bill 63 (SB 63), which seeks to amend Puerto Rico’s Transparency Act, arguing that it would dismantle the constitutional right of access to public information.
During a press conference held at Democracy Plaza in front of the Capitol, representatives from the Puerto Rico Journalists Association (Asppro, in Spanish), Sembrando Sentido, the Overseas Press Club (OPC), and the Puerto Rico Bar Association (CAAPR in Spanish) condemned the Senate’s plan to bring the measure to a vote without holding public hearings.
The organizations agreed that the bill represents yet another step backward for transparency in Puerto Rico and would undermine the public’s constitutional right to know how its government operates.
“SB 63 is an unnecessary bill that adds more bureaucracy to the process of accessing public information. It makes it harder for ordinary citizens by imposing additional requirements [to request public records], limits journalists’ work, and harms the people, who will lose access to information they are entitled to,” said Asppro President Nydia Bauzá.
The group also pointed out that none of the recommendations made by more than a dozen civil society organizations during two days of public hearings the CAAPR held in May were included in the bill’s text. All the participating organizations opposed the measure, and their written testimonies were sent to every senator.
OPC President Gloria Ruiz Kuilan agreed that the bill “is a severe blow to public access to information,” noting that it would delay and weaken citizens’ ability to hold the government accountable.
“Transparency is not a concession granted by the state; it is a constitutional right. The Puerto Rico Supreme Court itself has recognized this, international organizations confirm it, and a mature, responsible democracy demands it,” she said.
NGO Sembrando Sentido Executive Director Issel Masses pointed out that the proposed amendments would double the response time for government entities, make it easier for public information to be classified as confidential, and leave information requesters’ privacy unprotected.
“This bill does not strengthen transparency — it dismantles it. […] In short, it increases delay, bureaucracy, and impunity,” Masses said.
In a written statement, the public participation advocacy group, Espacios Abiertos Executive Director Daniel Santamaría Ots emphasized that Section 4 of the bill eliminates the requirement for agencies to provide information in Excel spreadsheets or CSV files — formats often used in investigative work.
“This change limits access to machine-processable data and hinders the reuse of public information for academic research, journalistic reporting, fiscal analysis, and knowledge production in the nonprofit sector, ultimately harming its intended beneficiary: the people of Puerto Rico,” he said.
The executive secretary of the Union of Journalists, Graphic Arts, and Related Trades (Upagra), Néstor Soto, also joined in the opposition, noting that public agencies have already used the Transparency Act to delay journalists’ efforts to obtain public records.
“As more requirements are added, they discourage information requests and obstruct journalists’ work — the very people who submit the most requests. The effect is to limit the public’s right to know what its government is doing,” Soto said in a written statement.
Serious Setbacks for Transparency
SB 63 would double the response time for government agencies, extending the period to process information requests from 20 to 40 business days. It would also grant agency heads the authority to decide what data can be disclosed, introducing new bureaucratic obstacles that make it easier to reject legitimate requests.
If enacted, SB 63 would also make it harder for community organizations to access essential information about public works, municipal ordinances, and other data they need to understand and respond promptly to proposals announced in their towns or regions. The bill further imposes additional barriers on citizens without digital access and includes merely symbolic penalties on government agencies that do not ensure meaningful transparency.
“In Puerto Rico, information held by the government is presumed to be public. It is not presumed to be hidden away or locked in files that citizens cannot access. […] I have no doubt that the only purpose here is to conceal, to hide, and to make it even harder for people like you, like us, and the rest of the public to obtain information,” said Kevin Rivera, second vice president of the Puerto Rico Bar Association.
Santamaría Ots added that the measure would increase the administrative burden on the judiciary, since the specialized San Juan court would have to handle every information request and a higher volume of special petitions related to unfulfilled requests.
Meanwhile, Centro de Periodismo Investigativo Editorial Director Wilma Maldonado Arrigoitía joined the chorus of criticism, calling on Gov. Jenniffer González to take a stand and publicly commit not to sign Senate Bill 63.
“This controversy could be resolved if she took that leadership role,” Maldonado said.
Among the organizations that joined the opposition to SB 63 were Kilómetro Cero, the Citizens’ Commission for the Audit of Puerto Rico’s Debt, Ayuda Legal Puerto Rico, Amnesty International, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Federation of Fishers, María Fund, 9 Millones, Todas, Bonita Radio, the Legal Clinic of the Interamerican University School of Law, Firmes, Unidos y Resilientes con la Abogacía (FURIA), the Resiliency Law Center, as well as students and faculty from communications schools across the island and representatives from other media outlets.
A Call to the Senate
The organizations issued an urgent appeal to senators to vote against SB 63 and to protect the constitutional right of access to public information.
“Our call is to stop this measure — to halt its progress,” said Asppro President Nydia Bauzá, who urged lawmakers to send the bill back to committee and hold public hearings.
“We firmly reject this bill because it represents a historic setback. It discards the constitutional right to know, normalizes delays, and opens the door to institutionalized censorship,” added OPC President Gloria Ruiz Kuilan.
The organizations reaffirmed their commitment to defending the public’s right to know and to building a government that is truly open and transparent.
SB 63 was approved by majority vote on Tuesday and now goes to the House of Representatives.
This translation was generated with the assistance of AI and reviewed by our editorial team to ensure accuracy and clarity.
