Source: "Blic"
Previous Draft Law on Data Confidentiality submitted to Serbian Assembly
Amendments to the Law, drafted on the basis of severe criticism from the expert community, were not included in the Draft Law submitted to the Assembly. Any changes to the text of the Law will now be possible only through amendments.
Marija Males
After the Draft Law on Data Confidentiality caused a storm and after Rodoljub Sabic, Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, and Sasa Jankovic, the Republic Ombudsman, criticized it and the Ministry of Justice promised to amend it, the Serbian Government submitted the Draft Law to the parliamentary procedure without a single amendment.
As they assure us, all amendments drafted on the basis of criticism from the expert community, from restrictions of powers of the Commissioner for Information and the Ombudsman to access secret data to control of secret services' operations, will be submitted to the Assembly as amendments. Although it has already became a practice of the Serbian Government to change laws by submitting its own amendments with draft laws, it is obvious that in this way it leaves a possibility to stop in the Serbian Assembly the amendments it does not want to be adopted, but has to propose them because of public pressure. When all amendments enter the parliamentary procedure, it is all a matter of political will and any group of deputies of the ruling coalition can always decide not to vote for them. The Draft Law on Data Confidentiality envisaged that the Commissioner for Information and the Ombudsman must have an approval from competent authorities - the National Assembly, the Government or the National Security Council - to access any confidential document, which practically makes protection of citizens' right and freedoms, for which the Commissioner and the Ombudsman are competent, impossible.
The decision of the Ministry of Justice to submit such draft law to the parliamentary procedure was met with much disapproval by the expert community and subsequently the public debate was initiated and an expert opinion was requested from the Council of Europe, but this opinion had not been disclosed as of yesterday. Rodoljub Sabic, Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, said in a statement given to "Blic" daily he assumed that if the Government had submitted amendments to the Draft law, they would be adopted.
He added that all the fuss about the Draft Law on Data Confidentiality which had been initiated this summer by his and Ombudsman's criticism had ended in unusual readiness of the Ministry of Justice in our country to accept argumented criticism and to amend the Law according to it. However, Mr. Sabic emphasized it would be nice if the public knew the content of the opinion of the Council of Europe as well. - Since the Ministry of Justice has already expressed in public its readiness to accept the main criticism, the opinion of the experts from the Council of Europe in this specific case is not as important in practice as it would otherwise be, but its importance is huge as a matter of principle. Indeed, I was not the only one to criticise this Law. It was met with almost universal criticism from Sasa Jankovic, the Ombudsman, and other members of the expert community. I am convinced that the expert opinion of the Council of Europe confirmed this criticism and it is another warning that the government apparatus must rely more on the contribution the expert community in our country can give in drafting of new laws - Mr. Sabic said.
He added that this unfortunately rarely happens and we bear numerous harmful consequences because of that and reminded about the case of the Information Law which will have its epilogue at the Constitutional Court and which was highly publicized, but is certainly not an isolated case.
Mr. Slobodan Homen, State Secretary at the Ministry of Justice, said in a statement given to "Blic" daily that after a public debate, the Task Force on Drafting of the Law harmonized its opinion with the opinion of independent authorities that all restrictions pertaining to access to information classified as confidential should be deleted from the existing Draft Law. However, he added that "there is no need to withdraw the Law from the procedure". - The amendments envisage access to secret data for all public authorities, including the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, the Ombudsman, auditors, the Anti-corruption Agency and the Governor of the National Bank of Serbia - Mr. Homen said.
He further explained that the issue of competence of institutions could arise if someone's request for access to information is rejected. According to him, court protection against any decision of a security service which refuses to submit requested information is provided. He added that an interested party could lodge an appeal to the Ministry of Justice as a second instance authority and it could petition for an administrative dispute. - Amendments to the Law stipulate that the Ministry of Justice is also responsible for control of the implementation of the Law and for checking whether all security services had justifiable grounds for placing confidentiality mark. On the basis of that control, the Ministry can give order to services to remove that mark - Mr. Homen said. He pointed out that the Ministry of Justice must also report on all activities to the Committee on Defense and Security of the Assembly. Mr. Homen explained that the Task Force on Drafting of the Law requested expert opinion and accepted all received suggestions. - The opinion of the Council of Europe was that equal access to confidential information should be provided to everyone - Mr. Homen said.
Interfile: Disputable Provisions of the Draft Law on Data Confidentiality
Restrictions of powers of the Commissioner for Information and the Ombudsman to access secret data
Lack of control - creators of secrets control themselves or are controlled by one professional service
A possibility to classify virtually anything as a secret
The right to employ one security officer in every public authority
Employees in Government's professional service which should deal with implementation of the Law will have 20 percent higher salaries than other public officers
This service does not have inspection powers without which control is impossible
Security officers risk extremely symbolic fines in the amount of RSD 5,000 to 50,000 under this Law if they classify data as a secret without justification or if they classify as a secret data and documents which obviously do not pertain to protected interests.
