当前位置: X-MOL 学术Archival Science › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Public versus private status of records and archives: implications for access drawn from the archives of political representatives in the United States, France and Germany
Archival Science Pub Date : 2021-11-02 , DOI: 10.1007/s10502-021-09375-y
Mikuláš Čtvrtník 1, 2
Affiliation  

The basic prerequisite for records, archives and information to be open to the public one day is that their own status must be public. Selected examples from the United States, France and Germany demonstrate a trend in the development of the relationship of advanced democratic societies to records of mostly official origin, especially the top representatives of public political power (presidents, government ministers and secretaries, chancellors). Civil society increasingly shows an interest in access to records that testify to the actions of their top representatives. States are gradually enforcing the interpretation of “their” records as public and not private. However, these representatives still demonstrate a strong feeling that society is not quite entitled to these records. The USA, France and Germany all deal with this matter in different ways. A top politician, especially in the performance of his role or entrusted office, is not a private citizen. Therefore, there should be much stricter and more thorough public scrutiny, and a requirement for transparency. Controversial records, perceived to be on the border between public and private status, should always be treated as public. Top political and public officials have much less “right to be forgotten” than ordinary citizens and thus it is their “duty to be remembered”.



中文翻译:

记录和档案的公共与私人状态:对从美国、法国和德国的政治代表档案中提取的访问的影响

记录、档案和信息有朝一日向公众开放的基本前提是它们自身的状态必须是公开的。来自美国、法国和德国的一些例子表明,先进民主社会与主要来自官方的记录的关系发展趋势,尤其是公共政治权力的最高代表(总统、政府部长和秘书、总理)。民间社会越来越有兴趣获取证明其最高代表行为的记录。各州正在逐渐将“他们的”记录解释为公共而非私人。然而,这些代表仍然表现出一种强烈的感觉,即社会并不完全有权获得这些记录。美国,法国和德国都以不同的方式处理这个问题。一位顶级政治家,尤其是在履行其职责或受托职务时,不是普通公民。因此,应该有更严格和更彻底的公众监督,以及透明度的要求。有争议的记录,被视为处于公共和私人状态之间的边界,应始终被视为公共。与普通公民相比,高层政治和公职人员的“被遗忘权”要少得多,因此他们的“被铭记的义务”。应该始终被视为公共。与普通公民相比,高层政治和公职人员的“被遗忘权”要少得多,因此他们的“被铭记的义务”。应该始终被视为公共。与普通公民相比,高层政治和公职人员的“被遗忘权”要少得多,因此他们的“被铭记的义务”。

更新日期:2021-11-02
down
wechat
bug