![]() |
![]() |
|
Ecoglasnost NM, Montana vs. Prevention and State Sanitary Control Department Facts: On 22 August 2001, the Director of the Prevention and State Sanitary
Control Department refused to grant access with a decision, stating that
the requested information was within the scope of Art. 13, para 2, subpara
1 of APIA. Arguments of the Parties: In the opinion of the Director of the Prevention and State Sanitary Control Department, pursuant to Art. 13, para 1, subpara 1 the leadership of the Hygiene and Epidemics Inspectorate was not obliged to grant access to the requested information. Issue of Interest: Conclusions: The interpretation of Art. 13, para 2, subpara 1 of APIA in the sense that this provision does not create an obligation of the relevant body to grant access to information is wrongful and it would render the whole law senseless. Conversely, this provision creates an obligation of the relevant body, when establishing substantial grounds and while striking proper balance between the possibly contradictory interests of the applicant on the one hand and the person in need of protection of data, to exercise its discretionary rights and obligations (operational independence). One cannot share the view that cases exist, in which goverbnment institutions have only rights without perceiving these rights as obligations as well. Any interpretation to the contrary would render senseless the principles laid down in Art. 6 of APIA and the obligation of the body under Art. 38 of APIA to give reasons for its decision. Secondly, the applicable arrangements (pursuant to Art. 11, para 2 of
NAA) will be the ones set out in EPA. The latter does not provide for
the restrictions laid down in Art. 13, para 2, subpara 1 of APIA and it
does not include any reference to APIA in this respect. Moreover, the
exercise of discreationary powers of the relevant body whether to grant
access to information about the condition of components of the environment
would place its subjective will above the human health or life. All this is indicative of poor knowledge of the law and hence non-performance on part of the Director of the Prevention and State Sanitary Control Department.
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 |