Mario Brittany, Kilty Jennifer
Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Canada.
University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Qual Inq. 2025 Jun;31(5):492-504. doi: 10.1177/10778004241256140. Epub 2024 Jun 3.
Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) requests are becoming an increasingly common method of qualitative inquiry, particularly for critical criminologists in Canada who face barriers in accessing Canadian prisons to conduct research. This article explores the politics of institutional gatekeeping and highlights the ongoing policing of critical criminological knowledge, necessitating the use of ATIP as a data collection method. Two case studies describe the strategies that the authors mobilized to acquire records from the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) when their applications to conduct research inside prisons were denied. The authors argue that while access to information legislation is promoted as allowing for increased accountability and transparency of the government, real transparency is a public myth. This lack of transparency is linked to the ascendancy of administrative criminology in Canada, which ultimately devalues critical research and inhibits information flows in and out of carceral spaces.
信息获取与隐私(ATIP)请求正日益成为一种常见的定性研究方法,对于加拿大的批判性犯罪学家而言尤为如此,他们在进入加拿大监狱进行研究时面临诸多障碍。本文探讨了机构把关的政治问题,并强调了对批判性犯罪学知识持续的管控,这使得有必要将ATIP用作一种数据收集方法。两个案例研究描述了作者在其进入监狱进行研究的申请被拒时,为从加拿大惩教署(CSC)获取记录而动用的策略。作者认为,虽然信息获取立法被宣传为可提高政府的问责制和透明度,但真正的透明度只是一个公众神话。这种透明度的缺失与加拿大行政犯罪学的兴起有关,这最终贬低了批判性研究的价值,并抑制了进出监禁场所的信息流。