Landmark decision on freedom of information by the European Court of Human
Rights
The Hungarian Civil Liberties Union won a freedom of information case against
the Republic of Hungary. For the first time, the right to access to state-held
information as part of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights
has been formally recognized, as reflected in today?s ruling by the European
Court of Human Rights. The Strasbourg based Court declared that withholding
information needed to participate in public debate on matters of public
importance may violate the freedom of expression.
This decision by the ECHR represents the final chapter in the battle that the
HCLU has been waging against the Hungarian Constitutional Court for almost 5
years. In 2004, the Constitutional Court denied the HCLU?s request for access
to a complaint submitted by an MP who was looking to have certain drug-related
offences struck from the Criminal code. Because the HCLU is active in the field
drug policy advocacy, particularly focused on harm reduction, the NGO wanted to
form an opinion on the particulars of the complaint before a decision was
handed down. The Constitutional Court denied the HCLU?s request, explaining
that a complaint pending before the Court could not be made available to
uninvolved parties without the approval of its author. The Constitutional
Court never consulted the MP. In response, the HCLU pursued the case the
Hungarian Supreme Court, where it was dismissed because the complaint was
deemed to contain ?personal data?.
Under Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, the freedom of
expression shall include the right to receive and impart information without
interference by public authorities. According to the Court?s decision, to
receive and impart information is a precondition of freedom of expression,
since one cannot form a well-founded opinion without knowing the relevant
facts. The Court considered the present case ?an interference ? by virtue of
the censorial power of an information monopoly ? with the exercise of the
functions of a social watchdog.? In the Court?s view, the submission of an
application for an abstract review of a legislation, especially by a Member of
Parliament, undoubtedly constituted a matter of public interest and ?it would
be fatal for freedom of expression in the sphere of politics if public figures
could censor the press and the public debate in the name of their personality
rights.? The Constitutional Court?s monopoly on information amounted to a form
of censorship which may result that the media and watchdogs won?t be able to
play their vital role to provide accurate and reliable information in public
debate on matters of legitimate public concern.
The Madrid based Access Info Europe welcomed the decision. ?This ruling
establishes that public bodies, including parliaments and courts, must make
public information that they hold - in particular when the information is
needed to conduct a public debate on matters of public importance. Not to do so
is a violation of a fundamental human right, the right to ask and the right to
know,? said Helen Darbishire, Executive Director of Access Info Europe. ?The
decision confirms a right already well established in Europe in at least 24
national constitutions and 40 national laws as well as by national court
jurisprudence,? added Darbishire. ?It?s a vital right for people who need
government information to defend other human rights, fight corruption and
participate in decision-making.?
_________________________________________________________________
Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces.
It's easy!
http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.foiadvocates.info/private.cgi/foianet-foiadvocates.info/attachments/20090414/dd25d7f5/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: itelet.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 106496 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.foiadvocates.info/private.cgi/foianet-foiadvocates.info/attachments/20090414/dd25d7f5/attachment-0001.doc>
