Information newsletter
Issue 1(13), January 2005

From the court room: The authorities turn APIA into a hurdle race
Public Officials aim to discourage citizens in their search for information, the Chairman of the Center of Nongovernmental Organizations in Razgrad states

Mister Milkov, how did it happen that all requests submitted by you under APIA have turned into court cases?

I could not answer that question since my desire and that of my colleagues was to receive information on issues that are relevant to all residents of Razgrad. We did not want to initiate court proceedings. Unfortunately, instead of providing the answers, which he owes to society, the mayor, Venelin Uzunov, preferred to keep silence. That is why we resorted to the court for the protection of our rights.

What was the information denied to you?

There were twenty-four requests, though I would classify the questions in several categories. We would like to know the conditions under which the administration gave municipality premises to political parties, sports clubs, nongovernmental organizations, etc. We also asked about the procedure for using the public registers of the Municipality. We were interested in the expenses of the mayor and his deputies for official trips abroad and in Bulgaria. We asked about the budget-paid bills for the mobile phones of the officials. We inquired about the fees disbursed for consulting and juridical services by the municipality councilors from the Bulgarian Socialist Party majority group, given that qualified officials had been appointed for those services. We questioned about the money transferred to the party newspaper “Duma,” wondering why it was chosen for public notices. We wanted to know the competition procedure for state procurement contracts entirely financed by the municipality. Although our requests contained various questions, the answer was always the same—a refusal, mostly mute, occasionally accompanied by some absurd explanation.

What were the explanations you received?

The answer about the money transfers to “Duma” newspaper was negative since the newspaper, which was a third party, did not give its consent for the disclosure of its official secrets. We, however, were not interested in the secrets of the company but in the allocation of the Razgrad taxpayers’ money. The absurdity of their grounds for refusal was highest when the information about the expenses for official trips of the mayor’s staff was classified as official secret. We, on our side, requested that the mayor explain the criteria on which decisions for information classification were taken.

Do you consider court proceedings the only way to access information under APIA?

It seems that there are no other means at the current moment. The officials use the APIA as hurdles in order to obstruct our activities. Even the judges serving on the two panels of the Razgrad District Court, who have already heard some of our cases, pay more attention to the formalities. A series of sessions have been postponed on the Municipality's request, in order for me to prove I could represent CNGO in court. I did that, but the irrelevance of the requirement remained. It is not important whether I submit a request as a chairman of an NGO or as an ordinary citizen and taxpayer. The problem is that no one gives account for the way our money is spent. It is an obligation of the authorities to provide such information to the taxpayers.

Currently, the common practice in Bulgaria is to discourage those citizens who dare to seek public information.

When, by resorting to the provisions of the APIA, we prove that we are right, I hope that the officials’ attitude will change. I believe that in the long run the local administration and the mayor of Razgrad will make public the information they are obliged to, without our inquiries.