Source : Blic
Interview - Mr. Rodoljub Sabic
Why we are not informed about the number of people watched by the security service or about the amount of SIA director's salary is a question that needs to be addressed both to the Agency itself and to the Government that condones such behaviour.In Serbia, the public is feared by many. In my annual report to the National Assembly, I drew attention to examples of public authorities experiencing particular problems in the implementation of the Law on Free Access to Information. I singled out the Security Information Agency (SIA), as a body that has shown utter disregard for all obligations imposed on it by the law - said Mr. Rodoljub Sabic, Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, in his interview for “Blic”.
- SIA has failed to meet even the most benign of its obligations, such as submission of a Report on FOIA Implementation or publication of a Directory, which have been observed by authorities at much higher levels of power - the National Assembly, the Government, the President of the Republic and the Supreme Court.
- Are we likely to ever find out how many people were put under surveillance by the SIA and how much is Mr. Rade Bulatovic, SIA director, paid?
It is now some time since I ruled that information on the number of people subjected to surveillance must be made public. In the meantime, even the Supreme Court rejected the appeal by the SIA against my resolution. Why the SIA continue to ignore the resolution they were legally bound to comply with even before lodging their appeal is a question that needs to be addressed both to the Agency itself and to the Government that condones such behaviour. It might interest you to know that the same issue was debated in Montenegro on a later date, with the decision of the Serbian Commissioner referred to as a precedent. Montenegrin public has been given access to information on the number of persons under surveillance and even on the number of employees at the Agency for National Security. I am not aware that this had any disastrous effects on national security in Montenegro.
The salary of the head of SIA is, I believe, lower than many other salaries of which the public has already been informed, and in any case such information would not compromise anything by merely telling the taxpayers, who by the way actually pay that salary, the exact amount. It is my belief that this information will soon be accessible to the public.
- What sanctions should be imposed on Minister Velimir Ilic and on the whole Government for withholding information contained in the Highway Concession Agreement?
The law does not provide for infringement sanctions imposable on the Government or its Ministers. The only possible sanctions could be those of a political nature. But I think the issue of sanctions is off the point in this particular case. It is far more important to make it an undisputable fact that the Government, as the initiator of the freedom of information law, which is seen as very liberal given the current situation in Serbia, must set a positive example to all when it comes to the implementation of this law. Otherwise, the law has slim chances of ever achieving its intended purpose.
- In which situations is it suitable to designate government agreements as secret?
Unlike the vast majority of European countries, we do not have a data classification law. That gives ample scope for arbitrary restriction of freedom of information, including the possibility to invoke “secrecy” to shield absolutely illegitimate interests. I believe the Government intends to address this issue adequately, by enacting a Data Classification Law. If it does, we will have far less problems.
- Which public authorities and Ministries appealed your resolutions and what was the outcome?
To this date, a total of 54 complaints have been lodged with the Supreme Court against the decisions of the Commissioner for Information. Nearly half of these were lodged by public authorities at different levels. At the national level, these included the SIA, the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Infrastructure, Oil Industry of Serbia, Public Utility Company “Roads of Serbia”, Yugoslav Airlines...
The Supreme Court has so far concluded some 30 cases, rejecting or voiding the complaints in all of them. The Supreme Court has even rejected the most recent complaint of the Ministry of Infrastructure, relating to my resolution in connection with the Concession Agreement.
- Do you have any mechanisms at all in your hands to ensure full implementation of the Law on Free Access to Information?
The Commissioner has no capacities, de facto or de jure, to enforce the Law by himself. Two key enforcement mechanisms are in the hands of executive authorities and, regrettably, are as yet not functional in practice. The line ministry of the Government of Serbia (the Ministry of Culture and Information) should institute infringement proceedings with magistrates against offenders. For two years this arrangement had not worked; it was only five or six months ago, following my relentless insisting, that the Ministry filed first petitions for infringement action and first penalties were imposed. However, the operation of the mechanism of responsibility is still far below the necessary level.
The second mechanism concerns the enforcement of Commissioner's decisions. Under the Law, decisions of the Commissioner are enforced by the Government of Serbia, where necessary. What is worrying is that, in the several dozens of cases when citizens, journalists, the media or others demanded of the Government to enforce these decisions, the Government has not acted in a single instance.
- Why are hindrances in the exercise of free access to information most frequently encountered where money spending is concerned? Are there attempts to conceal corruption?
The actual reasons vary, but corruption is high in our country, there is no doubt about that. In the most recent Corruption Perception Index, we were tied for 90-92 with Gabon and Surinam, with a score of 3.0, which indicates corruption as a systemic problem. This issue has to be addressed and transparency in the operations of those responsible for managing and spending public money and resources can be a major contributor in the process.
Interfile: 2,800 cases closed
- How many cases have you closed so far?
Out of a total of 3,500 cases, some 2,800 have been closed. This is a huge amount of work for a service employing six persons instead of 21, as originally intended, with only four lawyers, of which I myself am one.
There have been threats as well
- Have you ever been pressured by the authorities, have Ministers or other officials called you and asked you to do or not to do something? If so, when and why?
My job involves certain unpleasant situations. Not unexpectedly, there have been attempts at harassment, intimidation and threats. All of these have been anonymous and, while I have some cues, I think it would be unfair to name individuals or point to specific events without solid evidence. I have never been approached by a Minister or other senior official attempting to urge me to make a specific decision.
