BEIJING, Feb. 12-- The Chinese authorities may think they have done a sufficient job in last year's information transparency, but they have yet to convince the public.

Recently the central departments and local governments published their annual reports on the disclosure of information in 2014 under the nation's drive for a clean and transparent government, an unprecedented move.

Most authorities touted their efforts in promoting transparency in various aspects but without detailing how their budgets were spent, while some even marked their transparency as nearly 100 percent.

They were just feeling too good.

While hailing the authorities' improvement in transparency, people criticized that they tend to talk achievements and avoid problems in their reports.

For many, the information some authorities publicized last year was still opaque and information on people's concerns never published.

Authorities seem to only care about the act of disclosing, not what they disclose.

But the people care. They want tangible, minute information such as more details on the spending on official vehicles, official travel and reception, land acquisition and public facilities.

Information disclosure is not a mere formality but should be a demonstration of how authorities use their power entitled by the people and whether the power has been abused.

A really clean government should dare to expose their power under the sun and actively publish all information for the oversight of the people.

There are some good examples like the State Forestry Administration, which honestly apologized in its late disclosure on reporting and slow updates. The Ministry of Transport's annual report was also applauded by the public for clear information disclosure using charts and pictures.

Another strength is the steady questioning by the people, in some cases people have even charged governments for neglect in information disclosure.

According to the Supreme People's Court, failure in information transparency has become a major source of lawsuits against the government. Even for the "comparatively transparent" Shanghai municipal government, the number of lawsuits it lost concerning information disclosure accounted for 26.5 percent of the total lost lawsuits in the city in 2013.

Regarding the disclosure of government information, rules must be worked out to stipulate the exact scope of information that have to be published and how minute the information should be.

An evaluation mechanism led by a third agency is also suggested, as it is likely to be fairer and more objective than the governments' self-evaluation.