Jordan Lazov vs. Ministry of Environment and Water
On 28 March 2001, in the decision for refusal to grant access to information,
which was given in writing, the Minister stated that the requested documents
contained personal data of the authors of those statements and the witnesses.
Arguments of the Parties:
Therefore the assertions in the reasons of the appealed decision that the acts contained personal data could be true only partially. The decision itself made explicit reference to those documents which (in the opinion of the Minister) constituted personal data. Hence, he did not dispute the fact that the other information contained in those acts was public. APIA provides for the right of access to public information rather than documents. Hence, with a view to the provisions of Art. 7 of APIA, Mr. Lazov had to be granted access to copies of the acts upon deletion of personal data therein.
Moreover, the claims that some information constituted personal data were untrue. Witnesses were identified only in the statements of findings and the penalty statements and not in the other documents, copies of which had been requested. It is an absurdity to claim that the names of persons acting as competent authority and signing documents are protected against disclosure.
Issue of Interest:
HOME | ABOUT US | APIA | LEGISLATIVE BASE | LEGAL HELP | TRAININGS | PUBLICATIONS | FAQ | LINKS | SEARCH | MAP
English Version Last Update: 25.01.2002 © 1999 Copyright by Interia & AIP