Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection Rodoljub Sabic said that, given the specific circumstances in Serbia, consistent implementation of the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance, including accountability for violation of the public's rights, was becoming increasingly important.
The Commissioner recalled that the many years during which virtually no one was held to account for any violation of the Law on Free Access to Information – as he had warned time and again – inevitably had an adverse effect on any efforts made to establish an accountable administration and fight corruption, crime and abuse.
Noting that issues concerning access to information relating to the operations of those entities that have access to large amounts of public assets and money, namely state-owned and public enterprises, can be seen as rather telling examples of the general state of affairs, Commissioner Rodoljub Sabic also said the following:
"In as many as 175 cases, national sate-owned and public enterprises failed to make information available even after being ordered by the Commissioner to do so, even though the Commissioner's decisions are binding under the law. Compared to the vast number of cases handled by the Commissioner, this figure might seem insignificant; however, it is anything but, because we cannot completely rule out that the withheld information could in fact give us some fascinating insights in terms of anti-corruption efforts. A particularly grave reason for concern is the fact that large enterprises such as "Telekom" (Serbian telecommunications company), "Srbijagas" (state-owned natural gas provider in Serbia), "Zeleznica Srbije" (Serbian Railways), "PTT Srbija" (Serbian postal service company) etc. have not complied with many decisions.
The Commissioner imposed fines as penalties for failure to comply with his decisions made pursuant to complaints filed by information requesters and ordered the provision of relevant information, but to very little avail. Indeed, in a rather cynical twist, the culprits actually use public money to pay the fines imposed for violations of the law and failure to fulfil their obligations to the public and persist with such behaviour. On the other hand, this is presumably the "logical" outcome, since none of the persons involved actually have anything at stake personally.
Over the years, I have warned time and again that other mechanisms for enforcing the Law, which are beyond Commissioner's power, are not functional. According to the letter of the law, the Government must enforce Commissioner's decisions where necessary; however, it has not done so since the beginning of implementation of the Law. The mechanism of accountability for violations of the law is also non-functional. Also, the competent ministries have failed for years to initiate infringement proceedings for violations of the law against responsible persons. It is commendable that the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government announced its intent to make a radical shift in this practice. It is even more commendable that this intent has been confirmed in practice these days through the submission of a large set of petitions for institution of infringement proceedings, but we should strive to ensure continuity in this regard, rather than responding ad hoc.
This is undoubtedly very important, because consistent implementation of the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance is certainly one of the best ways to contribute to anti-corruption efforts and to establish a more accountable, more cost-effective and more efficient system."
