Unfortunately, most of these findings and conclusions are still valid for the 11th year of APIA implementation. Even this year, AIP assessed the level of implementation of the obligations to provide active information based on the Bulgarian legislation. They are based on the analysis of the legislation and the problems that have appeared in practice.
It is time to monitor the implementation of obligations and sanctions for those who carelessly ignore them. The recommendation remains that the procedure for implementing the obligation to publish mandatory data pursuant to Art. 3 The exact steps for determining an existing overriding public interest in disclosure;
Assignment of the officials who will be responsible for overseeing the implementation of the listed activities. Information on these sanctions will be published in the annual State of the Administration report.
LEGISLATION
Previously, the minister was responsible for publishing an evaluation report on the implementation of the MPAJ (Article 16 of the APIA). As a result, the political responsibility for overseeing the implementation of the APIA is vague and ambiguous. It covers decisions to grant or refuse access on request (section 40 of the APIA).
In the latter case, the sanctions are under the supervision of the judiciary, not the executive. This fact in itself reveals that the fulfillment of the obligations under the APIA is taken seriously. The review of the legislation shows that eleven other statutes governing access to specific categories of information refer to the APIA.
In 2010 and 2011, problems in the implementation of the Law on Special Surveillance Means (SSMA) became evident. At the same time, according to the report of the head of the criminal divisions.
PROBLEMS AND TENDENCIES
IN ACTIVE DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION
AUDIT OF THE INTERNET SITES BY THE EXECUTIVE POWERFUL AUTHORITIES AT THE CENTRAL, REGIONAL AND LOCAL LEVEL. Institutional information - the institution's legal basis, functions, services provided, databases and information resources. An important element of active transparency is the publication of the budget and financial reports.
Relatively good is the implementation of a not so pleasant obligation for public officials - the publication of statements under Art. In our assessment, the AIP also assessed two other conditions necessary for the exercise of the right to information. Within the assessment period, Access to Information sections were created, internal access to information rules were uploaded.
Apart from civilian monitoring, there is no one else to oversee the implementation of the online publication obligations. Specific efforts are needed for the legal and practical development of the financial and operational transparency.
CASES REFERRED TO AIP FOR LEGAL ADVICE AND CONSULTATION
In some cases, information was obtained from regional units of the executive bodies (23), public law organizations (20), public law entities (16), the judiciary bodies (14), etc. See Annex 2: Statistics from the database of access to information program 2010). Of the well-founded refusals, most relate to the exemption of third party interests (art. The information requested by the editors-in-chief was made public by decision of the Ministry of Finance.
However, obtaining access to this information is still an exception regardless of the obligation to provide information under the ZZI, when the public interest prevails in the disclosure. The contract sparked media interest because of the delay in the production of new identity documents, which led to long queues and public discontent. Access was limited only to that part of the information related to the security of ID cards.
The names of the experts who had received remuneration under the program were withheld for privacy reasons. Thus, such information should not be rejected on the grounds of "protecting the interests of third parties." In the meantime, the journalist submitted a request demanding the same information, but from the Ministry of Finance. Ten years after the adoption of APIA, we are still witnessing cases referring to.
At the end of 2010, a group of citizens, who had requested information from the mayor of the municipality of Varna, were investigated by the Regional Directorate of the Ministry of the Interior - Varna. They were informed that the procedure had started with a complaint from the Directorate of "Legal Services" in the Municipality of Varna. In order to provide the required documents, the Commission requested a copy of the Association's Legal Status Certificate.
An employee of a national university hospital asked for consultation on the overall internal regulation of the protection of personal data in the hospital. What are the national competent bodies responsible for the operation of the system and what is the supervisory body regarding the lawful processing of personal data. If citizens suspect unlawful processing of their personal data in the SIS, they must address the national body responsible for the collection of the data (in Bulgaria it is the Ministry of Internal Affairs) or the national authority for the protection of personal data ( in Bulgaria - the Commission for Protection of Personal Data).
LITIGATION
2. point 1 of ZZIS as a public law entity that is not a state body. The Administrative Court - Razgrad accepted two appeals from the president of NGO Center - Razgrad, Georgij Milkov. Due to the prevailing public interest, the Supreme Administrative Court29 (VAS) overturned the refusal of the Ministry of Education, Youth and Science to provide access to the contract with Microsoft Co.
With a decision from March 201031, the ACSC revoked the refusal of the Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Agency (NRA). The court found that the information sought is environmental within the meaning of the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) and the conditions for its disclosure will be assessed in terms of its provisions. The EPA allows for a narrow interpretation of the restrictions on access to information and requires the public authority to take into account the public interest in disclosing the information.
Furthermore, the refusal was based on a lack of consent to provide the information from the third person in question (the company in question). The court forced the mayor to provide the information pointing out that the refusal was not justified by special circumstances showing that disclosure of the information would lead to unfair competition. The first was the case of the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee (BHC) against the Ministry of Justice (MoJ).
The court also highlighted the fact that the MoD has never presented the final act approved based on the reports. In the second case, the ACSC overturned the Prosecutor's Office's refusal to provide access to the report on the state of the Sofia Regional Prosecutor's Office and the actions and omissions of a regional prosecutor. In its decision33, the court stated that the report is the final act of supervision and control of the prosecutors according to the article.
With a decision34 of May 2010, the SAC confirmed a decision of the ACSC, which had withdrawn the tacit refusal of the Municipality of Sofia to grant access to the green areas management strategy and program to citizen Maria Samardzhieva. With a decision of October 201035, the SAC withdrew the tacit refusal of the Minister of Health to appoint Georgi Todorov M.D. to provide access to the Master Plan for Hospital Reform in Bulgaria. With a decision of May 201038, the Administrative Court – Yambol withdrew the silent refusal of the mayor of the municipality of Yambol in the case of journalist Diana Boncheva.
APPENDIX
COMPARATIVE DATA FROM AIP AUDIT ON THE WEB SITES OF EXECUTIVE POWER BODIES
Institutional Information - The institution's legal basis, functions, public services, databases and information resources. Is there a description of the procedure for access to public registers maintained by the institution. Does the APIA implementation report contain data on the reasons why the information was rejected.
Contact details for the department/official responsible for access to information - name, address, telephone number, e-mail, responsible official, working hours. Other types of information necessary to exercise the right of access to information.
STATISTICS FROM ACCESS TO INFORMATION PROGRAMME ELECTRONIC DATA BASE
LITIGATION CASE NOTES
- Bulgarian Helsinki Committee vs. the Ministry of Justice
- William Popov vs. The Ministry of Emergency Situations
- Dancho Zaverdjiev vs. the Municipality of Lovech
- Zornitsa Stratieva vs. the National Construction Control Directorate
- Ivailo Hlebarov vs. the Sofia Municipality
- Kalina Pavlova vs. the Chamber of Architects in Bulgaria
- Lachezar Lisicov (Desant daily) vs. the President of Bulgaria
- National Committee for Improvement of Water Supply in Bulgaria vs. Sofia Municipality
- National Movement Ekoglasnost vs. the Nuclear Regulatory Agency
- Nikolai Kolev vs. the Prosecution Office of Bulgaria
Access to the rest of the information was denied on the grounds that under the APIA, a requester can only request access to information, but not access to documents. 10529 on September 8, 2010, KSA rejected the complaint on the grounds that there was no description of the information requested in the request. With the decision of February 2011, the court annulled the refusal and forced the mayor to provide the information.
The court pointed out that the refusal was not based on specific circumstances showing that disclosure of the information would lead to unfair competition. The lack of consent of the third party was therefore not relevant to the case and did not constitute a lawful ground for refusal. By decision 2455 of 19 July 2010, an ACSC panel revoked the denial and forced the NCCD Chief Secretary to grant access to the information.
In a decision dated June 8, 2009, an ACSC panel withdrew the denial and sent the case back to the Municipality of Sofia for reconsideration. 4374 Effective December 22, 2010, a panel of the ACSC withdrew the denial and returned the case to the CAB for reconsideration. On April 26, 2010, Lachezar Lisicov, a journalist from the Desant daily newspaper, submitted a request to the First Secretary of the President.
3593 On 11 November 2010, an ACSC panel withdrew the denial and forced the government of the President of Bulgaria to provide the information. 4107 On December 10, 2010, an ACSC panel revoked the denial and forced the Sofia Municipality to grant access. 670 As of March 29, 2010, a panel of the ACSC rescinded the denial and returned the case to the NRA for reconsideration.
The court rejected NRO's argument that the information was a trade secret because of the confidentiality clause. 3959 of December 2, 2010, the ACSC panel overturned the denial and compelled the prosecution to grant access to the report. The Access to Information Program Foundation is a member of the Freedom of Information Advocates International Network (FOIA Net).
