Information transparency is a fundamental pillar of democratic governance, as it guarantees access to public information and strengthens accountability. This study compares the regulatory frameworks of Ecuador and Spain concerning transparency, analyzing their scope, access rights, exceptions, implementation, and sanctioning mechanisms. A qualitative approach was applied, employing a comparative design based on the documentary analysis of 28 key regulations. The findings indicate that Ecuador has a uniform and centralized regulatory system, characterized by short deadlines for information delivery and a clearly defined set of exceptions. In contrast, Spain operates under a decentralized regulatory framework, where autonomous communities have their own regulations, allowing for greater flexibility but also generating disparities in application. Sanctioning procedures in Spain are more structured and detailed, with specific criteria for sanction gradation, whereas in Ecuador, these processes exhibit regulatory gaps. The study concludes that while both countries demonstrate a commitment to transparency, areas for improvement remain, particularly in harmonizing procedures and enhancing the effectiveness of enforcement mechanisms. The adoption of best practices from each jurisdiction would contribute to strengthening information transparency and accountability in public administration.