Abstract

The paper discusses how Chile has moved between different models of enforcement regarding freedom of information complaints. It shows how the creation of a specialized agency to decide access to public information complaints impacts on the increase of cases and, in turn, the administrative implementation of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms influences the increase of decisions and user satisfaction. By employing a method combiÂning both quantitative and qualitative criteria, the paper evaluates the data available from 20 years of access to information laws. First, it examines how freedom of information was established in Chile by statute, legally entruÂsting its guarantee through judicial enforcement. Second, the paper reviews the creation of an administrative agency-called Consejo para la TranspaÂrencia-in charge of reviewing transparency complaints and expanding the exercise of the right. Finally, the paper describes how the model of conflict resolution has evolved and has received forms of mediation that allow faÂster resolution of cases and grant greater satisfaction to citizens and public officials.