We are living through a historic moment in which science, data, and truth are being openly disregarded. The script for one of the most recent episodes of this horror series, at the local level, is being written by the president of the Puerto Rico Senate, Thomas Rivera Schatz.
Let’s take a closer look.
On January 2, as he began his third term as Senate president, Rivera Schatz introduced Senate Bill 63, which seeks to amend the Transparency and Expedited Procedure for Access to Public Information Act. In other words, one of his top priorities at the start of this new four-year term was to restrict access to public information by adding new obstacles to an already flawed Transparency Act. This act was signed by former Governor Ricardo Rosselló just days before his resignation, in a vindictive move against the press that held him accountable.
Rivera Schatz’s Senate Bill 63 immediately raised alarm among many sectors that value transparency and accountability.
The bill is problematic for many reasons. To summarize a few: it doubles the time for agencies to deliver requested materials and adds layers of bureaucracy; it makes it easier to classify information as confidential without due process; it requires agencies to notify their heads every time an information request is filed; it eliminates the possibility of requesting data in open formats such as Excel or CSV; it creates new barriers for citizens without digital access; and it imposes only symbolic, ineffective penalties that do nothing to ensure real transparency.
As if that weren’t enough, under the proposed law, agencies would no longer be required to provide hard copies of requested documents. Instead, they could merely allow you to view the records at their offices, just for a single day, and still be considered in compliance. In the case of environmental matters, for instance, planning and permitting documents often run hundreds of pages and include plans and maps. If you can only view them for one day, without copies, in a disorganized fashion, you lose the right to review and analyze them carefully and effectively.
In the absence of official Senate hearings, and thanks to the initiative of the Puerto Rico Bar Association, we held public hearings in May to gather feedback on the bill from various civic and professional organizations. The response was overwhelming: near-unanimous opposition. A report summarizing the findings was prepared and circulated to all legislators and to Governor Jenniffer González Colón.
Despite the rejection of the measure by nearly a dozen organizations, a favorable report was issued on September 26 by the Senate Government Committee. And it’s worth pausing to examine what that means.
Of all the recommendations and objections presented by the entities that submitted explanatory statements to the Senate, not a single amendment was included. Those who submitted testimony included the Puerto Rico Bar Association, Sembrando Sentido, Kilómetro Cero, Firmes, Unidos y Resilientes con la Abogacía (FURIA INC.), the Legal Aid Clinic of the University of Puerto Rico School of Law, and the Centro de Periodismo Investigativo. In addition, the report from the public hearings held in May, sent to the Senate in August, reflected the perspectives of other organizations, such as the Gender Equity Observatory, the Resiliency Law Center, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Inter American University School of Law Legal Clinic, and Vínculo Animal PR.
In other words, during its evaluation of this bill, the Senate received input from only one government agency, while six civil society organizations opposed the measure. Yet the Government Committee, chaired by Senator Ángel Toledo López, issued a favorable report that failed to incorporate any of the proposed amendments. This report was prepared with a reckless disregard for the truth.
Six government agencies were asked to submit explanatory statements to the Senate: the State Elections Commission, the Office of Management and Budget, the Office of Legislative Services, the Department of Justice, the Fiscal Agency and Financial Advisory Authority, and the Office of Court Administration.
Only one agency responded, the State Elections Commission (SEC). This is the same entity that faced intense scrutiny last year for its poor performance during the electoral process, when serious problems in the voter registry were exposed. Thousands of individuals were listed as having voted in the 2016 and 2020 elections, despite having died or left Puerto Rico before those dates. The Commission’s failures included delays in registering new voters, irregularities in early voting, malfunctioning voting machines, problems during the vote count, and the inability of 70% of polling stations to transmit results.
I can’t help but see the irony in the fact that an agency plagued by deep problems of opacity, inefficiency, and credibility —an entity openly controlled by the ruling party— is the only one “informing” the Puerto Rico Senate about the Transparency Act.
And, of course, they took full advantage of the opportunity. They requested amendments that were never discussed publicly, as no public hearings were held, yet they appear in the committee’s favorable report on the bill. Although these amendments have not yet been incorporated, they are deeply troubling and dangerous.
The State Elections Commission is asking that:
- The time allowed for the SEC to respond to information requests under Law 141-2019 during an election cycle be doubled from the standard deadline set by that law.
- When information is requested within 60 days before an election, the agency has 60 working days to provide the requested data.
- If information is requested while an election is underway, the SEC has 20 working days after the vote count concludes to respond to the request.
- Any information in the voter registry be classified as confidential.
- There are countless reasons to reject this bill. Beyond the serious affronts it poses to the constitutional right of access to information, there has been zero participation, zero debate, zero dialogue.
Is the Senate president aligning himself with the philosophy of the current Chief of Staff, Francisco Domenech, who, in the fervor of his party’s electoral victory last November, declared in his victory speech: “Respect the majority decision of the people of Puerto Rico, because in a democracy, the majority rules”? If the governor won with just 41.26% of the vote, as certified by the State Elections Commission, then the majority of Puerto Ricans who voted did not choose her. In every democratic society, it is essential to govern for all citizens, to seek consensus, and to listen. Is that too much to ask?
The Centro de Periodismo Investigativo calls on everyone to express their firm opposition to this bill in every possible way and through every available platform. Speak out within your families, among friends, on social media, in letters to senators, anywhere you can educate others, share information, and advocate to ensure that these harmful amendments to an already deficient law are not approved.
This translation was generated with the assistance of AI and reviewed by our editorial team to ensure accuracy and clarity.
