Copies of two audit reports

Yurii Ivanov vs. the Public Internal Financial Control Agency

1st Instance Court – Sofia City Court, Administrative Division, Panel 3-g, Case No. 2001/01
2nd Instance Court – Supreme Administrative Court, 5th Division, Case No. 5246/02

Mr. Yurii Ivanov, a Chairperson of the Civil Association “Public Barometer” in the town of Sliven, filed a request with the Director of the Public Internal Financial Control Agency (PIFCA). Mr. Ivanov demanded copies of two audit reports issued after PIFCA inspections in two higher education schools in Sliven, branches of the Technical University of Sofia.

With a written decision, the director of PIFCA refused access to the demanded information. The director stated that the submitted request did not contain particular questions, i.e. description of the requested information. Furthermore, the director’s decision was on the merits since he refused the information on the grounds of administrative secrets. The text of the decision quoted the provision of the State Internal Financial Control Act (SIFCA), which stipulated that the oversight bodies were obliged to keep secret any information that had been obtained during their work.

Mr. Yurii Ivanov challenged the refusal before the Sofia City Court (SCC). The court dismissed the complaint and ruled that the refusal was justified. According to the court, the request did not give the necessary description of the demanded information and the requester had not defined the nature of his demand. The grounds for the PIFCA director’s refusal, stating that the information fell under the category of the administrative secrets, were not discussed by the court.

The Supreme Administrative Court (SAC), as a higher instance court, overturned the judgment of the SCC. The court ruled that the request contained accurate and precise description of the demanded information and no particular provision of the SIFCA stipulates the requested information as office secrets. SAC Supreme Administrative Court reversed the refusal and returned the information request to the PIFCA Director for reconsideration.