This report is published as part of the Support to the Access to Information Program as Citizens' Resource Center for Freedom of Information (FOICRC) project, implemented by the Access to Information Program and supported by a grant from the Trust for Civil Society in Central and East Europe (CEE Trust). This played an important role in the debate on the adoption of the Bulgarian Law on Access to Public Information in 1998-2000. The first part of the report presents an analysis of legal changes in the field of access to public information.
The changes in the APIA are compared and interpreted from the point of view of the standards set out in the Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents. Broad application of the exemption from the right of access to information related to the protection of trade secrets and interests of third parties without regard to the public interest in disclosure. A requirement for a universal electronic signature for submitting requests for electronic access to information, resulting in the restriction of anyone's right to information;
LEGISLATION
A group of specialists on access to official documents will monitor the implementation of the convention by the parties. Introduction of the overriding public interest test in the disclosure of information that may fall within the exemptions;. 15a to the APIA determined the obligation for the online publication of the information in terms of Art.
The changes in the APIA implemented the narrow interpretation of the exceptions taken in Decision No. In 2008, the issue of transposing the Directive into national legislation was raised. The transposition of the Directive into national legislation was implemented in this way.
ACTIVE DISCLOSURE AND ELECTRONIC ACCESS TO INFORMATION
15 are published on the websites of the administrative structures within the executive power system. 1, no. 4 and subsection 2, as well as the existing internal rules regarding access to information and the procedure for access to the public registers maintained by the administrative structures within the executive power system, are published. The heads of the administrative structures of the executive branch system must fulfill these obligations one year after the changes to the APIA come into force, i.e.
During three consecutive years, the Access to Information Program has carried out an assessment of the availability of the information in accordance with Art. Established facts that institutions within the executive branch system require electronic signature for submission of electronic access to information requests. 21 The reports from the two participants in the study were used for the presentation of the results - Ms.
The process and forms should be designed to facilitate administration and citizens, not the other way around. The working time spent on justifying the rejection of the request could also be evaluated from a financial point of view. All primary data for submitted requests and institutions' responses can be viewed on the Access to Information Program website. 23.
Some of the institutions that requested a universal electronic signature to respond to requests have given reasons for this request in their decisions. For this reason, we think that a clarification is needed regarding the question: Is a universal electronic signature (UES) necessary for submitting a request electronically. 1 of the APIA, the request for access to public information must contain certain conditions - a request to affix a handwritten signature to the request is not among them.
Secondly, the use of the electronic signature requires technical skills that are not in everyone and requires special knowledge.
CASES REFERRED TO AIP FOR LEGAL ADVICE AND CONSULTATION
For example, in 25 registered cases, the refusal was explicitly justified by the provision of Art. 2. Only in three recorded cases was the information rejected on the basis of Art. 2. As a result of the explosions, the windows of many buildings in the suburban neighborhoods were broken.
Information about the real price was refused on the grounds of exemption from trade secrets - there were confidentiality clauses in the contracts with the buying companies. At the end of September 2008, the public debate was ignited about the consecutive increase in the price of natural gas in Bulgaria. This is the practice even if injustice and corruption lie behind the interests of the company.
There is a lot of interest in the topic, especially from specialized non-governmental organizations working in the field of environmental protection. For example, in the spring of 2008, the Association of Parks in Bulgaria submitted a request to the regional governor of Blagoevgrad for access to information about the construction of the ski and golf complex "Kulino" in the Pirin National Park. With his decision, the regional governor refused access to the requested information due to the exception provided for in Article 2.
Court practice regarding the permission of journalists to film a particular court hearing is conflicting. In 2008, the AIP team provided legal advice in 23 cases concerning violations of the right to protection of personal data. 27 The moratorium on execution of the death penalty was announced on 20 July 1990 by the Great National Assembly.
With the help of the AIP and on behalf of the prisoner's mother, a request for access to the data was made to the Ministry of Justice.
APPENDIX
There is no refusal under APIA Unfounded refusal Third party interests Silent refusal Information provided Personal data We are not obliged Information has already been provided Administrative secret Redirection to head office Information not kept state secret Do not impede decision-making Art. 13, paragraph 2 of the APIA (preparatory documents) Trade secret Redirect Lack of procedure Failure to provide active information. Ministries of local government Judiciary Other state institutions, established by law Commercial companies Regional bodies of executive power State agencies State committees Persons financed by the budget Executive agencies Regional governors State institutions, established by a CM.
LITIGATION
By decision of 28 September 2008, the Chamber of the Administrative Court in the City of Sofia (ACSC) annulled the refusal of the Chief Secretary of the Ministry of Environment and Water (MOEW), Mr. 2, point 1 APIA, since the protocol was a preparatory document without its own meaning. As a result, environmental information is not rejected based on the provision of Art. 2.
The refusal of the chairman of the STA was based on the mere statement that the information relates to the interests of a third party (the private company) and his consent for the disclosure was not obtained. In its ruling, the court panel concluded that in the specific case - specific and unusual - the requested access to the building of the National Assembly and respectively the provision of such access for the shooting of a movie was in itself a matter of access to public information was . 1, item 3 of the APIA according to which one of the forms of provision of access to public information was a paper copy.
Moreover, it is clear from the title of the decision itself – for the appointment of a working group to draw up a regulation, as required by art. For example, an appeal was lodged against the refusal of the Varna Administrative Court to grant access to the file of a case in which the former president of the court allegedly decided after accepting bribes. In a case against the refusal of the Chief Secretary of the National Assembly to grant access to the building to a film director, the court assumed that this building used to be the former Communist Party building, which is a well-known fact.
An appeal was filed again against the court decision, and in the decision38 of December 2008, the five-member panel of VAS decided that the provision of Art. 1. Article 5 of the Regulation did not specify any restrictions regarding access to data with a computer terminal. With this verdict, the five-member panel of the court annulled the decision of the lower court and challenged Article 3.
In 2008, Access to Information Program published the fourth volume of the book Access to Information Litigation in Bulgaria.
LITIGATION CASE NOTES
The STA appealed against the ACSC's decision to the High Administrative Court. The SMC chairman's tacit refusal was appealed to the Sofa City Administrative Court. It was argued that the information requested should not be defined as personal data within the meaning of the provision of art.
The court pointed out in its judgment that the chairman of the SMC was obliged to. The Decision of the RKS was appealed by the Chairman of the SBR before the SAK. 2, item 1 of the APIA (information relates to the preparatory work of a law and has no meaning in itself).
EPA's access to information regulations have undoubtedly established a special regime with respect to the provisions of the APIA. Environmental information cannot therefore be refused with reference to the provision in art. A hearing of the case in an open court session in the SAC was scheduled for June 2009.
The decision of the Administrative Court - Razgrad was appealed before the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC). It was stated that the case incurred budgetary expenses incurred for the publication of documents of the municipality. 4 of the Act on the Protection and Development of Culture (PDCA), in terms of which Regulation the minister must define the selection procedure for directors of state cultural institutions (in the form of a paper copy);
Any request for access to information under the APIA should include a description of the public information sought, as set out in Art. 1 of the EPA, which made the former inapplicable when the information requested was related to the environment. The Access to Information Program Foundation is a member of the International Freedom of Information Advocates Network (FOIA Net).
