Source: Danas
The law about the free access to the information predict the duty of Commissioner for the information to give, every year, in term of three months after the ending the fixed year, the report to the National Parliament, about the enforcement of this law. This report consists of, not just the information about the activities and measures that Commissioner had taken, but also the information about the condition in this area in general, meaning the information relevant to the realization of the freedom of the access to the information in all the segments of the state authorities. During the next month, I will give the report to the National Parliament, which in the big part of it will consists of the delivered reports of the state authorities. Time- limit of the delivery is over, a huge number of reports arrived, and probably there will be more. Anyhow, it' s about the voluminous materials that consists the big quantity of the information and my associates and I will need time to examine and synthesized them in one big report. That' s why it is too early to speak about very exact particularities or to take out some categorical conclusions. Still, I can now say that the report, besides the rest, certainly consists of the three-contravertial constants, which are for the progress of the enforcement of the law 'till now charcteristical. One good, second relatively good, and third, bad, absolutely bad. The good thing is that the report that I am going to give to the Parliament certainly will certify the continuing the positive trends. Number of the information that are during the year 2007, the state authorities gave to the public, press, media, non governmental organizations and others, will be much bigger part than the one in 2006, that was, on the other hand bigger than the one in 2005. When it is about the demands for the protection of the rights directed to Commissioner, it will show that the percent of cases is growing, in which Commissioner doesn't' t have to order formally, in which after first intervention of Commissioner, the state authorities give the information that he first refused. This particularity is interesting, not just because it' s illustrating the growth of the authority of the law and institute of Commissioner, but also because it directs to the conclusion that the state authorities with a little bit better organization and a little bit more good will could accomplish the useful result in the sight of better show of the transparency of their work, content people and media, and less unnecessary administration. The report will certainly certify a certain progress comparing to the previous years in relation with the measures which the state authorities undertake in order to make the suppositions for the better quality of the enforcement of the law, like activities on the plan of the training the stuff, publishing the Informatory of the work and similar. Relatively good thing is that the statistic particularities will certify the positive trend in relation of the state authorities to the duties that they have according to the law, including the most elementary ones as well. Exactly, the relation to the duties of delivery to Commissioner could serve like an example. Those reports were delivered from all six biggest state authorities (National Parliament, President of the Republic, The Government, Supreme Court of Serbia, Constitutional Court, the State Attorney Office). As well as the Governmental Agency of the Autonomous Region of Vojvodina (parliament, executive council and other regional secretariats). We also have one hundred percent of the execution of the duties in net of the trade courts. In all other state authorities, except the local self- management, percents are moving over the 75 percent and higher. This year, form more than about 730 draftees, ' till now nearly 550 reports have been given, or about 75 percent, meaning more than the last year (2006) when 480 reports (about 67 percent) have been given by the draftees, which was also more than the previous year. Of course, we shouldn't have the illusions. This positive, entering trend should be respected by the context of the sort and the nature of the obligation. It is about the most elementary, very benignant obligation, which arrives only once a year. I think that in the light of that fact, that the particularity of the obligation of the giving the reports, accomplished barely 50 percent of the communities, which is even less than the last year' s, also very bad 52 percent, tells about the relation to the law that could be estimated as the scandalous. In the same context the " interesting" particularity comes when it' s about the ministries, meaning the organs that are the most responsible, by the definition, to the enforcement of the law, we don' t have full execution of the duties. Last year just one ministry didn't deliver the report. This year, in the time limit, even five of them didn't do it. Probably this new, who knows which number in the order, the warning of Commissioner will fix that. No matter haw we experience the statistic's particularities, the fact that after three years of the enforcement of the law, in every case a huge number of state authorities is not executing their elementary, especially established duty by the law, is saying by it self, doesn't need the extra comment. That brings us to the third, absolutely bad thing, to that, that when it comes to the responsibility for the law braking, in the report of Commissioner, nothing could be said. Not delivering the reports to Commissioner is treated, as a violation by the law, is punishable with a fine. Besides that, as the fact that, in the up to date practice, this violation has been done a number of times, in the years before even more than this year, and 'till now no process has been initiated. As it is known, Commissioner has no legal authority for the proceeding, and even for the initiating the process against the ones who don' t complete their legal duties. The execution of the supervision of the enforcement of the law, and even the initiating the process, according to the law, should be the work of the Ministry of the Serbian Government that is competent for the information sector. From the beginning of the enforcement of the law, Ministry referred to not being able to answer to this duties, because it doesn't have the corresponding personnel, material, logistical and other resources available. Three years ago, these arguments had the determinated specific weight, but with their protocol, they certainly lost. With all our transitional doubts, conflicts and disagreements, there shouldn't be any doubts about what the case, of the state authorities in all levels massively are not executing the duties, other words, their braking the law, means. In every the least responsible society something like that is absolutely unacceptable. No matter what is the cause of that, ignorance, carelessness, irresponsibility, disorganization, arrogance, or something even worse, finally it is all the same, there shouldn't be any problems to agree that it shouldn't be tolerated. And that, not just in the relation to the law about the free access to the information, that is certainly a problem, could become our biggest problem. The author is Commissioner of the information of the public importance.
