An order prohibiting the disclosure of official information may be issued subject to any condition whatsoever, but there shall also be stated therein the type of information and the reasons for non-disclosure (Section 15 paragraph two).

     Upon the State agency/ State official receiving the request for the disclosure of any information pursuant to Section 15 paragraph one, the State agency/ State official may use its discretion to issue an order whether or not to disclose the so requested information. In the event, an order not to disclose information, the person requesting such information should be notified of the reason of non-disclosure and such notification should prescribe the type of information that is classified for non-disclosure and the supporting factual information thereof. For example, in the case where there is a person requesting for information relating to the disciplinary action of the State official whose conduct was believed to be dishonest and such investigation for the disciplinary action was unfinished. The State official may use his own discretion issuing an order not to disclose such investigative information where he must specify the reason of non-disclosure, the type of information which might affect the efficiency of law enforcement which might result in the investigation being delayed and unfinished pursuant to Section 15 paragraph one (2) of the Act, for instance.

     For the sake of clarity, the Act requires that in the event there is an order for non-disclosure of information by the State agency/ State official, the State agency/ State official must provide reason for not disclosing information. The benefits of providing reasons for not disclosing information are as follows:

     Firstly, the State official who issues an order not to disclose information shall use diligent and due care in considering the order not to disclose the information by providing the supporting reason and the principle of law; and

     Secondly, the person requesting the disclosure of information would realize that the non-disclosure order was carefully made without the State official’s intention to conceal information at his disposal. This shall create the creditability to the State official in making the concise administrative order.

     Section 18 states that: “In the case where a State official issues an order prohibiting the disclosure of any information under Section 14 or Section 15 or dismissing the objection of the interested person under Section 17, such person may appeal through the Board to the Information Disclosure Tribunal within fifteen days as from the date of the receipt of such order.” If the interested person objecting the order prohibiting the disclosure of information does not appeal to the Tribunal, the State agency or the State official shall not have to comply with the provision of the Act. However, if the person requesting for the information appeals to the Tribunal, the State agency/ State official must not disclose information until the Tribunal has issued an opinion order. If the Tribunal agrees with the order prohibiting the information disclosure and disagrees with the appeal of the person requesting such information, the State agency shall not disclose the information. On the other hand, if the Tribunal has issued a decision to partially disclose information, then the State agency must comply with the Tribunal’s decision due to the fact that Section 37 of the Act provides that the decision of the Tribunal is absolute and final.