Appeals to the Information Commissioner's office relating to the Freedom of Information Act are taking up to three years to handle due to a processing backlog.
Investigating staff faced with a growing public demand for their services are currently working on appeals dating back to 2000.
The commissioner's office received 690 appeals last year from people whose requests under the FoI Act were refused or only partially granted.
This compared to 491 in 2001 and 545 in 2000. The backlog will be inherited by Ms Emily O'Reilly, who is set to become the new Ombudsman and Information Commissioner on June 1st.
The office, which can reverse decisions of public bodies to refuse access to certain records, is supposed under law to make decisions on applications within three months.
While it is largely managing to meet this time frame for applications received within the past year, appeals which are part of the backlog of 420 cases can be on hand for three years.
One of the office's two senior investigators, Mr Liam Kelly, attributed the backlog to "a continuous upsurge" in use of the Freedom of Information Act. The office received 150 applications in the first three months of this year, a threefold increase on the same period last year, he said. "What I'm saying is that there's a lot of cases trying to get through the funnel at the moment," he added.
In a bid to reduce the backlog, the office's 12 investigators and 10 clerical staff last April began a "twin-track" approach, simultaneously handling current cases as well as long outstanding appeals.
"Current cases are by and large being dealt with on a current basis and we are ploughing ahead with the backlog and we are making good progress," Mr Kelly said.
Staff hoped to start working on appeals lodged in 2001 some time this year, he added. It was "difficult to call" when work would begin on appeals lodged in 2002, but he hoped that by the end of next year, the backlog would be gone.
Fine Gael's Mr Richard Bruton, a vocal critic of Government plans to further restrict the Freedom of Information Act, criticised the delays in handling appeals.
"There would be some requests for information that, with a wait of this period, the information would have be rendered totally ineffective . . . It really is back to the old issue of justice delayed is justice denied if people are going to have to wait that time for information."
Mr Kelly acknowledged that the delays of up to three years could "diminish the value" of the information sought.
Cases where a "very pressing need" could be established on grounds including ill health would receive priority, he added. The numbers of investigators at the office have been increased from four to 12 since 2000.
Mr Kelly said it was "hard to call" the demand faced by the office, as the number of cases appeared to be declining last year but then eventually picked up.