RNCCA vs. the City of Sofia
On 31 August 2001, an appeal was drawn up in connection with the first application. On 18 September 2001, a notice was received from the Deputy Mayor of the City of Sofia with a request for providing evidence of the court registration of the Association. In that connection, the Association sent the requeusted specific details.
On 12 October 2001, representatives of the NGO came to explain that they
had been granted access to the whole information specified in the four
applications. Nevertheless, the information was insuffcient and overpriced
(Order No. 10 of 10 January 2001 of the Minister of Finance on Eastablishing
Rates for the Costs Incurred in the Granting of Access to Information
under APIA by Type of Carrier).
Besides, it is important to note that APIA guarantees the general right of all individuals and legal entities of access to information. They are entitled to exercise this right without any need for proving their legal interest or producing evidence of their legitimacy (ad argumentum from Art. 25, para 1 of APIA).
The non-observance of the statutory time limits is another problem; the time limits for specifying details concerning the application under APIA are 30 days.
As far as implied refusals are concerned, there is already a ruling of a five-member panel of SAC on a case, in which the defence was represented by Alexander Kashamov, AIP lawyer (Case 7, CILA v.s MLSP), i.e. Ruling No. 8645 of 16 November 2001. The ruling gives a positive answer as to the issue whether an implied refusal to grant access to public information can exist.
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