I. Introduction

The Sangguniang Bayan, as the legislative body of a municipality, holds and produces a wide range of public records: ordinances, resolutions, committee reports, minutes of sessions, privilege speeches, committee hearing materials, budget documents, contracts submitted for legislative review, correspondence, administrative records, and documents relating to investigations or inquiries in aid of legislation.

In the Philippines, the general rule is openness. Citizens have a constitutional right to information on matters of public concern, and public officers are bound by the principle that public office is a public trust. However, the right to information is not absolute. A request for documents may be refused when the requested material falls within a valid legal exception, when the request is procedurally defective, when disclosure would violate privacy or confidentiality laws, or when the document is not actually in the custody of the Sangguniang Bayan.

A refusal must be handled carefully. An arbitrary denial may expose officials to administrative, civil, or even criminal consequences. A properly grounded denial, on the other hand, protects both public transparency and legitimate government interests.

This article discusses the legal bases, permissible grounds, procedure, form, and practical considerations for refusing a request for documents addressed to the Sangguniang Bayan.

II. The Governing Legal Framework

A. The Constitutional Right to Information

The starting point is Article III, Section 7 of the 1987 Constitution:

The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access to official records, and to documents and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for policy development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be provided by law.

This provision recognizes a direct right of access to official records concerning matters of public concern. Records of the Sangguniang Bayan, especially ordinances, resolutions, minutes, committee reports, budgets, appropriations, and legislative acts, generally fall within this category.

The same Constitution also provides, under Article XI, Section 1, that public office is a public trust. Public officers must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency, and act with patriotism and justice.

Together, these provisions create a strong presumption in favor of disclosure.

B. The Local Government Code

The Local Government Code of 1991, or Republic Act No. 7160, governs local legislative bodies, including the Sangguniang Bayan. It recognizes the public character of local legislative actions and requires local ordinances and resolutions to be properly recorded, posted, published, or made available according to law.

The Secretary to the Sanggunian has important custodial duties. Among these are keeping the journal of proceedings, maintaining records of ordinances and resolutions, keeping the seal of the local government unit, and performing other recordkeeping functions assigned by law or ordinance.

Because the Sangguniang Bayan operates as a public legislative body, its official acts are generally accessible, subject to lawful exceptions.

C. Executive Order No. 2, Series of 2016

Executive Order No. 2, issued in 2016, operationalized the people’s constitutional right to information in the Executive Branch. Strictly speaking, it directly covers departments, bureaus, offices, and agencies under the Executive Branch, including government-owned or controlled corporations and state universities and colleges.

Local government units are encouraged to observe and be guided by the same policy. Many LGUs have adopted their own Freedom of Information manuals, ordinances, or internal rules. Even when an LGU has not adopted a formal FOI ordinance, the constitutional right to information remains enforceable.

EO No. 2 is useful because it contains principles, procedures, and recognized exceptions that may guide local government offices, including the Sangguniang Bayan, when acting on requests for public records.

D. Data Privacy Act of 2012

Republic Act No. 10173, or the Data Privacy Act of 2012, protects personal information, sensitive personal information, and privileged information. A Sangguniang Bayan may hold records containing personal data, such as employee records, complaint affidavits, medical information, contact details, disciplinary records, social welfare records, or documents involving minors.

The Data Privacy Act does not automatically defeat the right to information. Rather, it requires the government office to determine whether disclosure is lawful, necessary, proportionate, and compatible with the purpose for which the data was collected. In many cases, the proper response is not total denial but redaction.

E. Civil Service, Anti-Graft, and Accountability Laws

Public officers who improperly withhold records may face liability under laws and rules governing public accountability. Relevant legal sources include the Revised Penal Code, the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, the Administrative Code, Civil Service rules, and Ombudsman jurisprudence.

The practical point is simple: refusal must never be casual. It must be based on law, written clearly, and made by the proper official or office.

III. General Rule: Disclosure Is Preferred

A request for documents addressed to the Sangguniang Bayan should generally be granted when the records are:

Official records;
In the custody or control of the Sangguniang Bayan or the Office of the Secretary to the Sanggunian;
Related to official acts, transactions, or decisions;
Matters of public concern; and
Not covered by a valid exception.

Examples of documents that are usually disclosable include:

Document	General Rule
Approved ordinances	Disclosable
Approved resolutions	Disclosable
Minutes of regular or special sessions	Generally disclosable, subject to redaction or exceptions
Attendance records of Sanggunian members in sessions	Generally disclosable
Committee reports formally submitted	Generally disclosable
Annual and supplemental budgets approved or acted upon by the Sanggunian	Generally disclosable
Records of nominal voting	Disclosable
Public notices, agenda, and calendars	Disclosable
Transcripts or recordings of public sessions, if officially kept	Generally disclosable

A request should not be refused merely because it is inconvenient, embarrassing, politically sensitive, critical of local officials, or made by an opponent of the administration.

IV. Who May Request Documents?

The constitutional right to information belongs to “the people.” Jurisprudence generally treats this right as available to Filipino citizens. Government offices may require the requester to provide sufficient identification and contact information to process the request.

However, local governments may voluntarily provide public documents even to non-citizens, corporations, researchers, journalists, civil society organizations, or foreign entities, unless the requested records are restricted.

A request should not be refused solely because the requester is:

A political opponent;
A journalist;
A critic of the mayor or Sanggunian;
A losing bidder;
A taxpayer from another barangay;
A civil society representative;
A social media commentator; or
A person who previously filed complaints against officials.

The motive of the requester is generally irrelevant when the document is public and disclosable.

V. Grounds for Refusing a Request

A refusal is valid only when based on law, recognized privilege, lawful confidentiality, lack of custody, procedural defects, or practical impossibility. The most important grounds are discussed below.

VI. Lack of Custody or Control

The Sangguniang Bayan may refuse a request when the document is not in its custody, possession, or control.

For example, the following records may belong to other offices:

Requested Document	Likely Custodian
Mayor’s executive orders	Office of the Mayor
Municipal payroll records	Human Resource Management Office / Treasurer / Accounting
Disbursement vouchers	Accounting Office / Treasurer
Bidding documents	Bids and Awards Committee
Building permits	Office of the Building Official
Business permits	Business Permits and Licensing Office
Police blotter	Philippine National Police
Health records	Municipal Health Office
Social welfare case records	Municipal Social Welfare and Development Office

A denial on this ground should not simply say “not available.” The better practice is to state that the Sangguniang Bayan does not have custody of the document and, when known, refer the requester to the proper office.

Sample wording

The requested document is not in the custody, possession, or control of the Sangguniang Bayan or the Office of the Secretary to the Sanggunian. Based on the nature of the record requested, the appropriate office appears to be the Municipal Accounting Office / Office of the Mayor / Bids and Awards Committee. This response is without prejudice to the filing of a request with the proper custodian office.

VII. Non-Existence of the Document

A request may be refused when the document does not exist.

The right to information gives access to existing records. It does not require the Sangguniang Bayan to create a new document, generate a new report, prepare legal analysis, compile statistics not already available, or answer interrogatories disguised as document requests.

For example, the Sanggunian may refuse requests such as:

“Prepare a summary of all speeches made by Councilor X since 2019.”
“Create a list of all ordinances that benefited Barangay Y.”
“Explain why the Sanggunian approved Ordinance No. 10.”
“Make a comparative table of all committee amendments for the last five years.”

However, if the raw records exist, such as minutes, journals, committee reports, or approved ordinances, the requester may be given access to those existing documents, subject to lawful limitations.

Sample wording

The requested record does not exist in the files of the Sangguniang Bayan. The right of access to information covers existing official records and does not require this office to create a new document, prepare a special report, or generate a legal opinion. Existing related records, such as minutes of sessions or approved ordinances, may be requested separately.

VIII. Request Is Too Vague, Overbroad, or Unreasonable

A request may be denied or returned for clarification if it does not reasonably identify the documents sought.

Examples of vague requests include:

“Give me all records of corruption.”
“Send me everything about the municipality.”
“Provide all documents involving public funds since 1991.”
“Give me all documents concerning every ordinance passed by the Sanggunian.”

A vague or overbroad request should not immediately be rejected with finality. The proper approach is to ask the requester to clarify, narrow, or specify the records needed.

When refusal may be proper

A refusal may be justified when, despite an opportunity to clarify, the requester fails or refuses to reasonably identify the document. It may also be justified when the request would unreasonably disrupt operations due to its volume, lack of specificity, or oppressive scope.

Sample wording

The request, as presently worded, is too broad and does not reasonably identify specific records. Please specify the ordinance number, resolution number, date range, subject matter, committee, session date, or type of document requested. Processing may proceed once the requested records are sufficiently identified.

IX. Documents Covered by Executive Session or Closed-Door Proceedings

The Sangguniang Bayan may hold executive sessions under its internal rules or applicable parliamentary practice. Matters discussed in executive session may involve sensitive, confidential, privileged, or legally protected information.

Examples may include:

Personnel matters;
Pending litigation;
legal strategy;
confidential negotiations;
disciplinary matters;
matters affecting minors;
security concerns;
sensitive investigations;
privileged legal advice; or
matters declared confidential by law.

A request for minutes, recordings, notes, or transcripts of an executive session may be refused if disclosure would defeat the purpose of confidentiality.

However, not everything connected to an executive session is automatically confidential. The Sanggunian should distinguish between:

The fact that an executive session occurred;
The general subject matter;
The final official action taken;
The confidential deliberations; and
Documents independently protected by law.

Final official acts, ordinances, resolutions, votes, and decisions are usually more difficult to withhold than deliberative discussions or confidential legal advice.

Sample wording

The requested record pertains to matters taken up in executive session and contains confidential deliberations involving [general description, e.g., pending litigation/personnel matter/security concern]. Disclosure at this time would impair the confidentiality recognized under the rules of the Sanggunian and applicable law. This denial is limited to the confidential portions of the record and does not preclude access to final official actions that are otherwise public.

X. Attorney-Client Privilege and Legal Work Product

Requests may be refused when they seek confidential communications between the Sangguniang Bayan and its legal counsel.

Examples include:

Legal opinions from the Municipal Legal Officer marked confidential;
Litigation strategy memoranda;
Draft pleadings;
Legal risk assessments;
Communications requesting legal advice;
Notes of counsel during privileged meetings;
Settlement strategy documents.

Attorney-client privilege exists to allow government officials to seek candid legal advice. It may apply to public entities when legal counsel provides advice in a professional capacity.

However, the privilege should not be abused. A document is not privileged merely because a lawyer saw it, received a copy, or was present in a meeting. The communication must be made for the purpose of obtaining or giving legal advice and must be intended to be confidential.

Sample wording

The requested document consists of confidential communication between the Sangguniang Bayan and legal counsel made for the purpose of obtaining legal advice. It is therefore covered by attorney-client privilege and may not be disclosed without proper authority or waiver.

XI. Pending Litigation and Prejudicial Disclosure

The Sanggunian may refuse disclosure of certain records when the documents relate to pending litigation, claims, or disputes and disclosure would prejudice the legal position of the municipality.

This may include:

Litigation strategy;
Draft affidavits;
Settlement proposals;
Internal assessments of liability;
Communications with counsel;
Evidence-gathering memoranda;
Documents prepared in anticipation of litigation.

But the mere existence of a pending case does not automatically make all related documents confidential. Approved ordinances, resolutions, contracts, notices, public bidding records, and other official documents may remain disclosable unless a specific exception applies.

Sample wording

The requested document is part of internal litigation preparation and contains legal strategy concerning a pending case involving the municipality. Disclosure would prejudice the municipality’s position and is therefore denied on grounds of privilege and litigation-related confidentiality.

XII. Deliberative Process and Pre-Decisional Documents

A request may be refused when it seeks internal, pre-decisional, and deliberative materials whose disclosure would impair frank discussion among officials.

Examples include:

Draft ordinances not yet filed or officially sponsored;
Internal comments on proposed measures;
Staff recommendations;
Internal policy options;
Unapproved committee working drafts;
Notes reflecting tentative positions;
Internal memoranda prepared before a decision is made.

The purpose of this exception is to protect the decision-making process, not to conceal final government action. Once a policy is adopted, the final ordinance, resolution, committee report, and official vote are generally disclosable.

The exception should be applied narrowly. Factual material may sometimes be separated and disclosed if it is not intertwined with deliberative content.

Sample wording

The requested document is a pre-decisional and deliberative internal working paper prepared to assist members of the Sanggunian in considering a proposed measure. Disclosure at this stage may impair frank discussion and the legislative decision-making process. Final official actions and approved records remain available subject to applicable rules.

XIII. Drafts, Notes, and Personal Working Papers

Not every paper held by a Sanggunian member, staff member, or committee aide is an official record. Personal notes, private annotations, unofficial working drafts, and incomplete handwritten reminders may not be subject to disclosure if they are not official records and were not adopted, filed, or used as the basis for official action.

Examples:

A councilor’s handwritten notes during debate;
Personal reminders of a staff member;
Uncirculated draft language;
Private annotations on a copy of an ordinance;
Personal research notes not filed with the Secretariat.

However, if a draft is officially submitted, circulated as a committee draft, attached to a committee report, or used as the basis for a formal action, it may become part of the official record.

Sample wording

The requested material consists of personal notes or unofficial working papers that are not official records of the Sangguniang Bayan and were not filed, adopted, or made part of official proceedings. The request is therefore denied as to those materials.

XIV. Personal Information and Data Privacy

The Sangguniang Bayan may refuse or limit access when disclosure would violate the Data Privacy Act.

Documents may contain:

Home addresses;
Contact numbers;
Birth dates;
Signatures;
Government identification numbers;
Medical information;
Financial information;
Family background;
Personnel records;
Records involving minors;
Complaints containing sensitive allegations;
Social welfare information;
Disciplinary records;
Personal data of private citizens.

The proper response is often not full denial. The office should consider redaction, anonymization, or partial disclosure.

Example

If a requester asks for copies of attendance sheets from a public consultation, the Sanggunian may disclose the fact of attendance but redact personal phone numbers, signatures, addresses, and email addresses.

Sample wording

The requested record contains personal and sensitive personal information protected under the Data Privacy Act of 2012. The document may be released only after redaction of protected personal data, unless the requester establishes a lawful basis for full disclosure or the data subject gives valid consent.

XV. Personnel Records

Requests for personnel records require special care.

Some employment-related records of public officials and employees may be of public concern, especially those involving position, appointment, salary grade, office assignment, official duties, and public accountability. However, other parts of a personnel file may be private or confidential.

Usually protected or restricted:

Medical records;
Psychological evaluations;
Personal data sheets containing sensitive information;
Family information;
Home address and contact details;
Tax identification numbers;
Government ID numbers;
Leave records revealing medical conditions;
Administrative case records before final disposition, depending on circumstances;
Performance evaluations, when protected by applicable rules.

Potentially disclosable:

Name;
Position;
office;
salary grade;
appointment status;
official duties;
publicly relevant qualifications;
final administrative decisions, subject to applicable rules;
public accountability records.

Sample wording

The requested personnel file contains personal, sensitive personal, and privileged information. Full disclosure is denied. Only information relating to the employee’s public position, office assignment, and official functions may be released, subject to redaction of protected personal data.

XVI. Records Involving Minors

Documents involving minors should be treated with heightened confidentiality.

Examples include records connected with:

Children in conflict with the law;
Child abuse complaints;
custody disputes;
school disciplinary matters;
social welfare interventions;
health records;
juvenile proceedings;
minors appearing as witnesses or complainants.

Even when the Sanggunian has legislative interest in a matter, documents identifying minors should usually be withheld, redacted, or anonymized.

Sample wording

The requested document contains information identifying minors and is subject to heightened confidentiality under laws and policies protecting children. Disclosure is denied, except as to anonymized or redacted information that may be lawfully released.

XVII. Law Enforcement, Security, and Public Safety

Requests may be refused when disclosure would compromise law enforcement, public safety, or security.

Examples:

Security plans for municipal facilities;
evacuation vulnerabilities not yet addressed;
confidential police coordination reports;
witness identities;
intelligence information;
emergency response weaknesses;
security camera layouts;
threat assessments;
documents concerning ongoing investigations.

The Sanggunian may possess such documents if they were submitted during hearings or briefings. Even then, public disclosure may be restricted.

Sample wording

The requested document contains security-sensitive information. Disclosure may compromise public safety, law enforcement operations, or the security of municipal personnel and facilities. The request is therefore denied as to the sensitive portions of the record.

XVIII. Trade Secrets, Proprietary Information, and Confidential Business Information

The Sangguniang Bayan may receive documents from contractors, bidders, suppliers, concessionaires, public-private partnership proponents, or regulated businesses. Some documents may contain confidential business information.

Examples:

Proprietary technology;
trade secrets;
detailed pricing formulas;
confidential financial models;
protected technical designs;
proprietary methodologies;
commercially sensitive information.

However, this exception must be balanced against public accountability. Contracts involving public funds, awards, winning bids, terms of procurement, and official approvals are generally matters of public concern.

The office should separate disclosable public portions from legitimately confidential proprietary portions.

Sample wording

The requested document contains proprietary commercial information submitted to the municipality under circumstances indicating confidentiality. Disclosure may prejudice legitimate business interests. Public portions of the transaction, including final approved terms and official actions of the Sanggunian, may be released subject to redaction of protected proprietary information.

XIX. Bidding and Procurement Records

Procurement records are generally subject to transparency. However, timing matters.

Before award or while evaluation is ongoing, some documents may be restricted to preserve the integrity of the procurement process. After award, many procurement records become accessible, subject to redactions and lawful exceptions.

The Sangguniang Bayan may not always be the custodian of procurement records. The Bids and Awards Committee is usually the proper office for bidding documents.

Possible grounds for refusal or deferral include:

Ongoing bid evaluation;
confidential technical proposals;
proprietary information;
documents not in Sanggunian custody;
records covered by procurement rules on confidentiality;
premature disclosure that may distort competition.

Sample wording

The requested procurement records are not in the custody of the Sangguniang Bayan. They appear to be records of the Bids and Awards Committee. In addition, some procurement documents may be subject to confidentiality while evaluation is ongoing. The requester may direct the request to the BAC Secretariat.

XX. Bank Records, Tax Records, and Financial Privacy

Certain financial records are protected by specific confidentiality laws.

Examples:

Bank account details;
taxpayer information;
confidential financial submissions;
personal income tax records;
bank statements of private persons;
account numbers;
personal financial disclosures not legally open to the public.

However, public expenditure records, budgets, appropriations, disbursement summaries, audit reports, and contracts funded by public money are generally public records, subject to lawful redactions.

Sample wording

The requested record contains confidential financial information protected by law. Disclosure is denied as to bank account details, taxpayer information, and other protected financial data. Public portions concerning official municipal expenditures may be released where available and not otherwise exempt.

XXI. Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth

Requests for Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth, or SALNs, are governed by specific rules. Access may be allowed subject to statutory requirements, official procedures, and restrictions against improper use.

The Sangguniang Bayan should determine whether it is the proper repository of the SALN requested. In many cases, SALNs are filed with designated offices depending on the position of the official or employee.

A request may be refused if:

The Sanggunian is not the custodian;
The requester fails to comply with required procedures;
The purpose is prohibited by law;
The requested record is subject to restrictions under applicable SALN rules;
The request seeks information that must be redacted.

Sample wording

The requested SALN is subject to specific statutory and regulatory rules on access. The Sangguniang Bayan is not the proper custodian of the requested SALN / the request does not comply with the required procedure. The request is denied without prejudice to filing with the proper repository and in accordance with applicable SALN rules.

XXII. Privileged Communications and Confidentiality by Law

Certain documents are confidential because a specific law, rule, or privilege protects them.

Examples include:

Attorney-client communications;
executive session records;
medical records;
certain social welfare records;
records involving children;
confidential tax information;
bank records;
trade secrets;
protected personal data;
privileged communications under the Rules of Court;
documents sealed by court order;
matters protected by national security or public safety rules.

When refusing on this ground, the Sanggunian should identify the general legal basis without disclosing the confidential information itself.

Sample wording

The requested document is covered by confidentiality under applicable law and privilege. Disclosure is therefore not authorized. This denial is limited to the protected record and does not affect access to other documents not covered by confidentiality.

XXIII. Court Orders, Sub Judice Concerns, and Sealed Records

If a court has issued an order sealing records or restricting disclosure, the Sangguniang Bayan must obey the order. A request may be denied if disclosure would violate a court directive.

The “sub judice” rule alone should not be used loosely. The existence of a pending court case does not automatically make every related government document confidential. The refusal must point to a specific risk, privilege, order, or legal restriction.

Sample wording

The requested document is subject to a court order restricting disclosure. The Sangguniang Bayan is bound to comply with the order. The request is therefore denied unless and until disclosure is authorized by the court.

XXIV. Records of Complaints, Investigations, and Disciplinary Matters

The Sangguniang Bayan may receive complaints, affidavits, reports, and investigative documents, particularly when exercising oversight, conducting inquiries, or acting on matters within its legislative authority.

Disclosure depends on the status and nature of the proceeding.

Possible reasons for refusal:

The matter is still under investigation;
disclosure may prejudice fact-finding;
the record contains unverified accusations;
privacy rights of complainants or witnesses are involved;
the record contains sensitive personal information;
the matter involves minors;
the record is under executive session;
the document belongs to another investigative body.

Final decisions, official actions, and public accountability records may be more likely to be disclosed, subject to lawful redactions.

Sample wording

The requested records relate to an ongoing investigation and contain sensitive personal information, witness statements, and unverified allegations. Disclosure at this stage may prejudice the proceedings and violate privacy rights. The request is therefore denied, without prejudice to access to final official actions when disclosure becomes legally proper.

XXV. Committee Hearings and Legislative Inquiries

Committee hearings of the Sangguniang Bayan may generate notices, position papers, transcripts, recordings, exhibits, draft reports, and final committee reports.

The following are usually disclosable:

Hearing notices;
agenda;
attendance of public officials;
position papers submitted for public consideration;
final committee reports;
approved recommendations;
records of public hearings.

The following may be withheld or redacted:

executive session portions;
confidential legal advice;
sensitive personal data;
documents involving minors;
security-sensitive information;
privileged communications;
draft committee reports;
internal deliberative notes;
documents submitted under confidentiality.

Sample wording

The requested committee records include both public and restricted materials. Public hearing notices, agenda, and final committee reports may be released. However, executive session portions, privileged communications, and records containing sensitive personal information are withheld or redacted pursuant to applicable law.

XXVI. Minutes, Journals, and Recordings of Sessions

Minutes and journals of Sangguniang Bayan sessions are central public records. They document attendance, motions, votes, ordinances, resolutions, and proceedings.

As a rule, approved minutes and journals are public records. However, the Sanggunian may refuse or defer release of:

Unapproved draft minutes;
internal stenographic notes not yet verified;
executive session minutes;
portions containing confidential matters;
recordings not officially adopted or not retained as official records;
portions requiring redaction under privacy or confidentiality laws.

A distinction must be made between approved minutes and raw notes. Approved minutes are official records. Draft minutes are still subject to correction.

Sample wording for draft minutes

The requested minutes are still in draft form and have not yet been approved by the Sangguniang Bayan. Release is deferred until approval, unless the Sanggunian authorizes earlier release. Approved minutes may be requested once available.

Sample wording for executive session minutes

The requested minutes pertain to an executive session and contain confidential deliberations. Disclosure is denied as to confidential portions, without prejudice to release of final official actions that are otherwise public.

XXVII. Ordinances and Resolutions

Approved ordinances and resolutions are among the most clearly disclosable records. It would be difficult to justify refusing access to an approved ordinance or resolution, except for unusual circumstances such as:

The requested copy contains personal data that should be redacted;
The request is for a draft rather than the approved version;
The document does not exist;
The Sanggunian is not the custodian;
The request is abusive or impossible as framed.

Even controversial ordinances and resolutions should be released. The public has a right to know the laws and official acts of the municipal legislative body.

A refusal to release an approved ordinance or resolution without lawful basis is legally risky.

XXVIII. Budget Records and Appropriation Documents

Municipal budgets, appropriation ordinances, supplemental budgets, and related legislative records are generally matters of public concern. The use of public funds is at the core of transparency.

Usually disclosable:

Annual budget ordinance;
supplemental budget ordinance;
appropriation ordinance;
committee report on the budget;
record of votes;
approved local development investment program if part of official records;
public hearing notices;
final enacted budget documents.

Possibly restricted or redacted:

personal information in payroll attachments;
bank account numbers;
tax identification numbers;
confidential financial information of private entities;
internal pre-decisional comments;
draft budget proposals not yet officially submitted;
records not in Sanggunian custody.

A request for budget records should rarely be denied in full. Partial disclosure with redactions is usually more appropriate.

XXIX. Contracts, MOUs, and Agreements

Contracts approved, reviewed, authorized, or ratified by the Sanggunian often involve public funds or public obligations. They are generally matters of public concern.

However, refusal or partial redaction may be proper for:

trade secrets;
proprietary technical data;
personal information;
confidential business information;
security-sensitive provisions;
ongoing negotiations before final approval;
documents not yet executed;
drafts exchanged during negotiation.

The final executed contract involving public funds is usually disclosable, subject to lawful redactions.

XXX. Requests Made for Harassment or Abuse

A request should not be denied merely because the requester is annoying, critical, or politically hostile. However, there may be extreme cases where a request is abusive.

Examples:

Repeated identical requests already answered;
requests designed to paralyze the office;
requests using abusive or threatening language;
requests demanding immediate production of voluminous records without reasonable time;
requests that require disproportionate disruption of public service;
requests made in bad faith after records were already provided.

Even then, the office should respond carefully. It may impose reasonable procedures, schedules, reproduction fees, and clarification requirements. A complete refusal should be a last resort.

Sample wording

The office has previously provided the same records requested on [date]. The present request is duplicative and does not identify any new document. The request is therefore denied as repetitive, without prejudice to a properly specified request for records not previously released.

XXXI. Fees and Reproduction Costs

The right to information does not necessarily mean free photocopying, scanning, certification, or reproduction. The Sangguniang Bayan may charge reasonable fees authorized by ordinance or lawful administrative policy.

A request should not be denied because the requester has not yet paid, unless payment is required before reproduction and the requester refuses to pay. Inspection may sometimes be allowed separately from copying.

Fees must not be excessive or used to suppress access.

Sample wording

The requested records may be released upon payment of the applicable reproduction or certification fees under existing municipal rules. Failure to pay the required lawful fees may result in non-release of copies, without prejudice to inspection where allowed.

XXXII. Form of Access: Inspection, Copying, Certification, or Electronic Release

A requester may ask to inspect records, obtain photocopies, receive certified true copies, or obtain electronic copies.

The Sangguniang Bayan may regulate the manner of access to protect records from loss, damage, or alteration. It may refuse a specific requested format if unavailable or unreasonable.

For example:

If no digital copy exists, the office need not create one unless feasible.
If a record is fragile, supervised inspection may be required.
If certification is requested, fees and processing time may apply.
If a document contains exempt portions, a redacted copy may be provided.

A refusal to provide the exact format requested is not necessarily a refusal of access if another reasonable mode is offered.

XXXIII. Partial Denial and Redaction

A key principle is that if only part of a document is exempt, the non-exempt portions should be released.

This is especially important for documents containing:

personal information;
signatures;
addresses;
phone numbers;
bank details;
tax numbers;
names of minors;
confidential business information;
security-sensitive details.

The office should redact exempt portions and release the rest when reasonably possible.

Sample wording

The request is granted in part and denied in part. Portions containing personal information, sensitive personal information, and confidential details have been redacted. The remaining non-exempt portions are released.

XXXIV. Deferral Rather Than Denial

Sometimes the proper response is not permanent denial but deferral.

Deferral may be appropriate when:

Minutes are still in draft form;
a committee report is not yet approved;
procurement evaluation is ongoing;
an investigation is pending;
the document is being reviewed for redaction;
the requested record is temporarily unavailable due to archiving or retrieval;
disclosure is premature but may become proper later.

Sample wording

Release of the requested document is deferred because the record is still under review / the proceeding is ongoing / the minutes have not yet been approved. This is not a final denial. The requester may renew the request after [event or reasonable date], or upon completion of the relevant process.

XXXV. The Proper Officer to Act on the Request

Requests for Sangguniang Bayan records are commonly addressed to:

The Vice Mayor as Presiding Officer;
The Secretary to the Sanggunian;
The Municipal Vice Mayor’s Office;
The records officer or FOI receiving officer, if designated;
The chairperson of a committee, for committee records.

The Secretary to the Sanggunian is usually the primary custodian of legislative records such as minutes, journals, ordinances, and resolutions. However, denial of sensitive requests should be coordinated with the Presiding Officer, Municipal Legal Officer, Data Protection Officer, or Municipal Administrator, depending on the subject.

A refusal should not be issued by someone without authority. The signatory should be the lawful custodian or duly authorized officer.

XXXVI. Required Contents of a Denial Letter

A proper denial letter should contain:

Date of the request;
Name of requester;
Description of requested document;
Statement of action taken;
Specific ground for denial;
Legal or factual basis;
Whether denial is full, partial, or temporary;
Whether redacted records are available;
Referral to proper office, if applicable;
Available remedy, appeal, or request for reconsideration;
Name, position, and signature of authorized officer.

The denial should be clear but not disclose the protected information itself.

XXXVII. Sample Denial Letter

Republic of the Philippines Province of __________ Municipality of __________ Office of the Secretary to the Sangguniang Bayan

Date: __________

Name of Requester: __________ Address / Contact Details: __________

Subject: Response to Request for Documents

Dear __________:

This refers to your request dated __________ seeking copies of the following document/s: __________.

After evaluation, the request is denied / partially denied / deferred for the following reason/s:

The requested document contains information that is confidential under applicable law, specifically __________. Disclosure would __________.

Where applicable, non-exempt portions of the record have been made available / may be released after redaction / may be requested from the proper custodian office.

This denial is limited to the specific document/s or portions described above and does not prevent you from filing a new request for other records that are not covered by legal restrictions.

You may seek reconsideration or avail yourself of remedies provided under applicable law, ordinance, or office procedure.

Very truly yours,

________________________ Secretary to the Sangguniang Bayan / Authorized Officer

XXXVIII. Sample Partial Grant with Redaction

This refers to your request for copies of the attendance sheets and position papers submitted during the public hearing held on __________.

The request is granted in part. Copies may be released after redaction of personal information, including home addresses, contact numbers, signatures, and email addresses, in accordance with the Data Privacy Act of 2012.

The redacted copies may be obtained upon payment of applicable reproduction fees.

XXXIX. Sample Referral to Another Office

This refers to your request for copies of disbursement vouchers relating to the municipal project known as __________.

Please be informed that the requested records are not in the custody of the Sangguniang Bayan. Based on the nature of the documents requested, the proper custodian appears to be the Municipal Accounting Office and/or the Municipal Treasurer’s Office.

Accordingly, the request is denied as to this office, without prejudice to your right to file the request with the proper custodian.

XL. Sample Deferral for Draft Minutes

This refers to your request for the minutes of the Sangguniang Bayan session held on __________.

The requested minutes are still in draft form and have not yet been approved by the Sangguniang Bayan. Release is therefore deferred until approval.

Once approved, the minutes may be requested from this office, subject to applicable rules on redaction and reproduction fees.

XLI. Sample Denial Based on Executive Session

This refers to your request for the minutes and recording of the executive session held on __________.

The request is denied. The requested records contain confidential deliberations conducted in executive session concerning __________. Disclosure would defeat the confidentiality of the proceedings and may prejudice the rights and interests protected by law.

This denial applies only to the confidential executive session records. Any final official action taken by the Sangguniang Bayan, if embodied in an ordinance, resolution, or public record, may be requested separately.

XLII. Remedies of the Requester

A person whose request is denied may pursue available remedies, depending on the applicable local FOI ordinance, office procedure, or general law.

Possible remedies include:

Request for reconsideration before the same office;
Appeal to the Presiding Officer or local chief executive, if provided by local rules;
Complaint before the Civil Service Commission, where applicable;
Complaint before the Office of the Ombudsman for misconduct, neglect of duty, or violation of accountability laws;
Court action to compel disclosure, such as mandamus, where legally proper;
Administrative complaint under the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards;
Complaint before the National Privacy Commission if the issue involves improper disclosure or mishandling of personal data.

The denial letter should avoid implying that the requester has no remedy.

XLIII. Possible Liability for Improper Refusal

An improper refusal may expose officials to liability if the denial is arbitrary, malicious, discriminatory, or contrary to law.

Possible consequences include:

Administrative liability for neglect of duty, grave misconduct, oppression, or conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service;
Ombudsman investigation;
civil action;
court order compelling disclosure;
disciplinary action under Civil Service rules;
liability for violation of ethical standards;
reputational and political consequences.

At the same time, improper disclosure of confidential records can also create liability, especially when it violates privacy, privilege, child protection laws, procurement confidentiality, court orders, or security rules.

The public officer must therefore avoid both extremes: unlawful secrecy and reckless disclosure.

XLIV. Best Practices for the Sangguniang Bayan

1. Adopt a Local FOI Manual or Ordinance

A municipality should have clear rules on:

where requests are filed;
who receives them;
processing periods;
fees;
appeal procedure;
exceptions;
redaction;
electronic records;
records retention;
responsibilities of each office.

2. Maintain a Records Inventory

The Office of the Secretary to the Sanggunian should maintain an organized inventory of:

ordinances;
resolutions;
minutes;
journals;
committee reports;
session agendas;
public hearing records;
attendance records;
legislative calendars;
archived records.

3. Use a Presumption of Disclosure

When in doubt, determine whether redaction or partial disclosure is possible instead of denying the request entirely.

4. Coordinate With the Legal Officer

Requests involving litigation, privilege, confidential information, or sensitive political issues should be reviewed by the Municipal Legal Officer.

5. Coordinate With the Data Protection Officer

Requests involving personal data should be reviewed in light of the Data Privacy Act.

6. Keep a Request Log

The office should record:

date received;
requester’s name;
document requested;
office assigned;
action taken;
date released or denied;
reason for denial;
fees paid;
appeal or reconsideration, if any.

7. Redact Properly

Redaction should be irreversible. Do not merely highlight text in black in a word processor if the underlying text can still be copied. Use proper redaction methods.

8. Avoid Political Discrimination

Requests should be processed uniformly regardless of the requester’s politics, affiliations, or criticism of officials.

9. Separate Public Records From Personal Notes

Councilors and staff should distinguish between official documents and personal working papers.

10. Publish Commonly Requested Records

The Sanggunian can reduce disputes by proactively publishing:

ordinances;
resolutions;
session schedules;
agendas;
approved minutes;
committee hearing notices;
budget ordinances;
contact details for requests.

XLV. Common Mistakes to Avoid

Mistake 1: Saying “confidential” without explanation

A denial should identify the nature of the confidentiality. A bare claim is weak.

Mistake 2: Denying because the request is politically inconvenient

Political sensitivity is not a legal exception.

Mistake 3: Refusing approved ordinances or resolutions

Approved legislative acts are generally public.

Mistake 4: Releasing documents with unredacted personal data

Transparency does not excuse privacy violations.

Mistake 5: Treating all drafts as public or all drafts as confidential

The status, use, and filing of the draft matter.

Mistake 6: Denying because the requester did not state a reason

For public records, the requester’s motive is usually not controlling.

Mistake 7: Ignoring partial disclosure

Redaction is often legally safer than total refusal.

Mistake 8: Failing to refer the requester to the proper office

If the Sanggunian is not the custodian, referral is good governance.

Mistake 9: Giving oral denials only

Written denials create accountability and clarity.

Mistake 10: Letting unofficial staff deny requests

The response should come from the proper custodian or authorized officer.

XLVI. Checklist Before Refusing a Request

Before refusing a request, the Sangguniang Bayan should ask:

Is the requested record clearly identified?
Does the record exist?
Is it in the custody or control of the Sangguniang Bayan?
Is it an official record?
Does it concern a matter of public concern?
Is there a specific law, privilege, or rule restricting disclosure?
Can exempt portions be redacted?
Can partial access be granted?
Is the refusal permanent or merely temporary?
Has the requester been referred to the proper office, if applicable?
Has legal or privacy review been obtained when needed?
Is the denial in writing?
Does the denial state the reason clearly?
Does the denial mention available remedies?
Is the denial free from political bias or personal hostility?

XLVII. Practical Classification of Common Sangguniang Bayan Records

Record	Access Treatment
Approved ordinance	Usually release
Approved resolution	Usually release
Draft ordinance not officially filed	May deny if personal/pre-decisional
Filed proposed ordinance	Usually release, subject to rules
Approved minutes	Usually release
Draft minutes	Defer until approved
Executive session minutes	Usually deny or redact
Committee report, final	Usually release
Committee working draft	May deny as deliberative
Public hearing attendance sheet	Release with redactions
Position papers submitted publicly	Usually release
Legal opinion from municipal lawyer	May deny if privileged
Budget ordinance	Usually release
Payroll attachment	Redact personal data
Contract approved by Sanggunian	Usually release with redactions
Procurement evaluation records during ongoing bidding	May defer or refer to BAC
Complaint affidavits	Depends; often redact or deny during pending proceedings
Records involving minors	Usually deny, redact, or anonymize
Security plan	Deny or heavily redact
Personal notes of councilor	Usually not official record
Audio recording of public session officially kept	Generally release, subject to rules
Raw recording not official record	Depends on local rules
SALN	Follow special SALN rules

XLVIII. Legal Theory Behind Refusal

The law recognizes that transparency serves democracy, but confidentiality also serves lawful public purposes. The legal task is balancing.

A valid refusal rests on one or more of these theories:

No public right attaches because the document is not an official record, does not exist, or is not in custody.
The right exists but is limited by law, such as privacy, privilege, child protection, tax secrecy, bank secrecy, or procurement confidentiality.
Disclosure would impair a protected governmental function, such as litigation, law enforcement, security, or deliberative decision-making.
The request is procedurally defective, such as being vague, overbroad, or non-compliant with reasonable requirements.
Disclosure is premature, such as where minutes are still drafts or proceedings are ongoing.
Partial disclosure is required, because only some portions are exempt.

The strongest denials are narrow, specific, and supported by identifiable legal interests. The weakest denials are broad, vague, political, or unsupported.

XLIX. Constitutional Limits on Refusal

Because the right to information is constitutional, exceptions should be construed narrowly. A local legislative body cannot create arbitrary exceptions by mere internal preference. An internal rule of the Sanggunian cannot defeat the Constitution unless it is grounded in a legitimate legal limitation.

For example, a rule saying “all committee records are confidential” would be legally vulnerable if applied to final committee reports, public hearing documents, or records of official action. On the other hand, a rule protecting executive session deliberations, privileged legal advice, or sensitive personal data would be more defensible.

The Sangguniang Bayan should remember that secrecy is the exception, not the rule.

L. Refusal by Silence or Inaction

Failure to act on a request may amount to constructive denial. This is poor practice and may create liability. Even when the request cannot be granted, the office should respond within a reasonable period or within the period provided by local FOI rules.

A written response protects both the requester and the office. It shows that the request was received, evaluated, and acted upon.

LI. Relationship With the Vice Mayor and Sanggunian Members

The Vice Mayor, as presiding officer, has an institutional interest in preserving the integrity of legislative proceedings. The Secretary to the Sanggunian, as records custodian, handles legislative records. Individual Sanggunian members may possess copies of documents, but official requests should normally be processed through the official custodian.

A councilor should be careful in independently releasing documents that may contain confidential information, especially executive session materials, legal advice, personal data, or pending investigative records. Conversely, a councilor should not block release of public records merely because the record is politically unfavorable.

LII. Interaction With Local Autonomy

Local autonomy allows municipalities to manage their internal affairs, but it does not authorize them to disregard constitutional rights. A municipality may adopt reasonable rules for processing document requests, but those rules must be consistent with the Constitution, statutes, and jurisprudence.

Reasonable local rules may cover:

office hours for inspection;
request forms;
identification requirements;
reproduction fees;
certification fees;
processing timelines;
record preservation safeguards;
redaction procedures;
appeal mechanisms.

Unreasonable rules may include:

requiring the requester to prove political neutrality;
requiring approval of the mayor for all Sanggunian records;
refusing documents unless the requester explains a “good reason”;
imposing excessive fees;
delaying release indefinitely;
denying all requests from critics;
treating all legislative records as confidential.

LIII. Records Already Posted or Published

If the requested document is already publicly available, the office may direct the requester to the publication source. However, it should not use publication as an excuse to refuse certification if the requester specifically needs a certified true copy and is willing to comply with lawful requirements.

Sample wording

The requested ordinance is already available for public inspection at __________. If a certified true copy is required, it may be obtained from this office upon payment of the applicable certification fee.

LIV. Electronic Communications and Digital Records

Modern Sanggunian work may involve emails, chat messages, scanned documents, cloud folders, and electronic drafts. Whether these are disclosable depends on their nature.

An email may be an official record if it documents official action, transmits official documents, or forms part of government business. But personal messages, informal exchanges, privileged communications, and deliberative drafts may be protected.

The Sanggunian should adopt rules on digital records retention, official email use, and archiving. Refusal may be proper where the requested digital material is personal, privileged, not official, or not retained as a record.

LV. Social Media Requests

Requests made through Facebook, Messenger, or other social media platforms may raise procedural issues. The Sanggunian may require that formal requests be filed through the official receiving channel, especially when identification, payment, certification, or redaction is required.

However, the office should not ignore the request entirely. It may respond by directing the requester to the proper form or office.

Sample wording

Requests for official records are processed through the Office of the Secretary to the Sangguniang Bayan. Please file a written request identifying the specific document needed, together with your contact details, so the office may properly evaluate and process the request.

LVI. Refusal Where the Request Seeks Answers, Opinions, or Explanations

The right to information generally concerns access to records. It does not compel officials to answer questions, justify votes, give legal opinions, or create explanations.

The following may be refused as improper document requests:

“Why did the Sanggunian pass this ordinance?”
“Explain the real motive of Councilor X.”
“Give your legal opinion on whether the ordinance is valid.”
“Tell me who secretly influenced the vote.”
“State the political reasons behind the resolution.”

However, existing documents related to these questions may be disclosed, such as minutes, sponsorship speeches, committee reports, transcripts, and voting records.

Sample wording

The request asks for an explanation or opinion rather than access to an existing official record. This office is not required to create a new explanation or legal opinion. Existing records, such as minutes, committee reports, ordinances, and resolutions, may be requested separately.

LVII. Denial Based on National or Local Emergency

During emergencies, access may be regulated due to office closure, disaster response, damaged records, or urgent operational needs. However, emergency conditions should not be used as a blanket excuse for secrecy.

A deferral may be justified when:

records are inaccessible due to disaster;
staff are assigned to emergency response;
office operations are suspended;
documents require retrieval from damaged archives;
disclosure would compromise emergency operations.

Sample wording

Processing of the request is temporarily deferred because the relevant records are presently inaccessible due to __________. The office will act on the request once normal access to the records is restored.

LVIII. The Role of Good Faith

Good faith matters. Officials are less likely to incur liability when they:

receive the request properly;
evaluate it carefully;
consult legal or privacy officers;
apply recognized exceptions;
release non-exempt portions;
explain the denial in writing;
avoid political discrimination;
preserve the records;
provide remedies.

Bad faith may be inferred when officials destroy records, delay without reason, deny selectively, conceal wrongdoing, demand unlawful fees, or invent confidentiality grounds.

LIX. Record Preservation During a Request

Once a request is received, the office should preserve the requested record. Destroying, altering, removing, or tampering with requested documents may lead to serious liability.

If the document is subject to a retention schedule, the pending request should suspend destruction until the request is resolved.

LX. Conclusion

A Sangguniang Bayan may refuse a request for documents, but only for lawful and clearly stated reasons. The constitutional presumption favors disclosure, especially for ordinances, resolutions, minutes, committee reports, budget records, and other documents reflecting official legislative acts.

Valid refusal may rest on lack of custody, non-existence of the document, vagueness, overbreadth, confidentiality by law, data privacy, attorney-client privilege, executive session confidentiality, ongoing investigations, procurement confidentiality, security concerns, trade secrets, or the deliberative nature of pre-decisional materials. Even then, the office should consider partial disclosure, redaction, referral, or deferral before issuing a total denial.

The safest rule for the Sangguniang Bayan is this: release what is public, redact what is protected, refer what belongs elsewhere, defer what is premature, and deny only what the law allows to be denied.