Source: ‘'Blic''
Bad legal remedy for secrets
If this law is enacted, the Commissioner and the Ombudsman will not have access to any piece of information labeled confidential.
М. Маles
If the new Draft Law on Confidentiality of Information suggested by the government is enacted everything will be confidential in Serbia. Instead of creating some order and finally defining what would be secret, the government decided to suggest legal solutions which hinder work of the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Ombudsman even more. The Commissioner for Information, Rodoljub Sabic thinks that the whole Draft opposes EU standards.This is yet another in succession of laws proclaiming ‘'to be taking us nearer to the EU'' and ‘'introducing order'', while they contain solutions opposed to EU standards and offer a semblance of order in stead of really introducing it. We really need a good and clearly defined balance between the freedom of access to information and protection of some information, but such law cannot provide it. It cannot solve existing problems, it can only create a temporary illusion that it has - says Sabic.
Considering the fact that this is the first law to regulate this field, what are the greatest objections to it?
- I will list only some of the multitude of objections, the main one being that the Draft, instead of offering an efficient mechanism for providing application of democratic standards in this field, offers only a semblance of this. In addition, it envisages such limitations of the Commissioner and Ombudsman's authority nowhere to be seen yet. Pursuant to law these organs have the right of access to all information necessary for performing their work. This right is stipulated in the law, and it does not depend on anyone's approval or compliance. If the Draft Law on Confidentiality gets adopted, these two bodies will not have free access to any piece of information labeled confidential in the future. It is really incredible that there are ‘'experts'' who think that these organs should even ask for authorization to access a document that e.g. the director of a veterinary station has marked ‘' internal''. They will even need to have authorization, which can be denied in some cases, to access documents of the lowest level of confidentiality, And some situations in which this authorization could be denied are really disturbing. How can the Ombudsman or the Commissioner for Information perform their duty to protect human rights if e.g. someone can deny them a possibility to check whether someone has applied forbidden methods or acts, torture or unauthorized tapping in relation to citizens? Finally it is impalpable that this Draft completely ignores the issue of insiders, people who have defied formal rules of secrecy in order to protect public interest.
Which information would be classifiable as confidential?
- Generally speaking, the span of such information has been determined correctly, in a manner used in most developed countries. In general, information relating to safety, defense and international relations could be treated as confidential. But nothing is a guarantee that in reality it will really be so. The ‘'principle'' that the creators of secrets are to control ‘'themselves'' is stressed, and the solutions according to which they would be controlled ‘'externally'' by one expert service can in no manner yield effect. The expert service is not a state organ and it does not have and it cannot have supervisory and investigative powers necessary for a serious control.
Are there any good solutions in the law?
- I guess there are, but I haven't managed to find them yet, maybe because I am under impression of so many bad solutions.
Which information is secret now, and they should not be? Give some examples, please. What information is the government and state responsible to publicize?
- Unfortunately, this is true, but it is something that we do not know exactly. Too often the label ‘'confidential'' hides information which does not deserve to be secret and also it must not be, as it a cover for things such as incompetence, lack of results, abuses, even criminal and corruption. Democratic government should strive to publicize as much as possible information relating to its work, especially information on allocation of public money and resources. It should be done actively and proactively, publicizing information without delay not waiting for someone to ask for it.
Why documents on property of officials are not made public?
- As far as such documents are concerned, pursuant to the Law on the Agency for Fighting against Corruption as of 1st January next year, they will be available to the public.
What does the fact that a law to hide information more than to reveal it will be passed mean?
- Laws used to unnecessarily limit a legitimate public right to know can only be harmful. It is especially true of countries which are, as our country, faced with large problems of corruption and mistrust in government institutions.
