Consequently, the official access response was altered to conform to the informal response. In each of these three cases, senior public officials were involved in the unacceptable activities. In the DND case, two officers were court-martialled. One was acquitted of charges of suppressing a file and committing an act to the prejudice of good order and discipline. The other was charged with wilfully making a false statement in a document and negligent performance of duty.
Most public officials are honourable, professional persons of integrity.
But, as in any large organisation, there are some bad apples at all levels. And even amongst the most conscientious, there is a lack of understanding of the fiduciary duty they owe to the public for the information resources of the government. Many, even after 16 years under the Access Law, still think in proprietary terms about the records they generate and hold. Even the most conscientious of officials are guilty from time to time of removing and destroying the post-it notes attached to records. Public officials will be much more careful to ensure that records are only disposed of in accordance with approvals obtained from the National Archivist.