The Use of the APIA Turned Into a Hurdling RaceHow the municipal administration in Razgrad discourages citizens to seek informationStela Kovacheva
Georgi Milkov is a chairperson of the Non-governmental Organizations Center in Razgrad which is an association of seven civil organizations. As one of the founders of the Bulgarian Association for Fair Elections and Civil Rights in the city of Razgrad, he is well known in the third sector community. Since September 2004, the Center managed by Milkov has filed 24 access to information requests. No answer has been received on any of the questions within the legally prescribed period. The Center filed complaints in the court against the refusals, most of which had been silent. Now, 24 cases under the Access to Public Information Act (APIA) are to be scheduled by the Regional Court of Razgrad.[1] What was the reason of all your requests filed under the APIA to turn into court proceedings? I could not answer the question. The desire of my colleagues and me was not to go to court, but to obtain information related to the problems of the citizens of Razgrad. Unfortunately, the mayor Venelin Uzunov instead of giving the answers that are due to the public, preferred to keep silence. That is why we sought protection of our right to know in the court. What was the type of information that was refused? I would group the questions into several topics. We wanted to know what are the conditions under which the administration gives for rent municipal property to political parties, sports clubs, non-governmental organizations, what is the procedure of using the public registers that the municipality maintains. We requested about the amount of budget allocated for official trips of the mayor and his deputies in the country and abroad, the mobile phones bills of the municipal officials paid with budget money. We wanted to know if any remuneration was paid to the municipal council members from the Bulgarian Socialist Party for consultation or legal services when there is appointed staff to perform these functions. We put forth a question about the amount of money paid for advertisements to the party newspaper Duma, when it was not clear why it was given a preference. We requested information about public procurement tenders finance completely by the municipality. Despite of the different questions we ask, the answer is the same – a refusal. In most of the cases it is a silent refusal. Seldom, accompanied by an absurd justification. On the question about the money paid to the newspaper Duma, the administration answered that the newspaper, which is a third party whose interest are affected, does not give their consent for the disclosure of information that is their trade secret. We are not interested in any trade secrets but in the way the money of the Razgrad taxpayers are spent in different directions. We were surprised by other absurd answers as well. In order to decline our request about the expenses made by the mayor’s team, they said that the information is classified as official secret. On our turn, we asked the mayor about the criteria on which the classification as official secret is done. Do you think that litigation is the only way you could obtain the information that is due under the APIA? It seems that there is no other way in the current moment. The officials use the law as slalom poles to make us hurdle. Even the servants of Themis in the face of two panels of the Regional Court of Razgrad which is already hearing part of our cases, pay more attention to the formal side of the complaint. A number of sittings were postponed at the request of the municipality because I had to provide evidence as the legal representative of the Non-governmental Organizations Center in the town of Razgrad. I did that but my question is does it matter if I request information as a representative of an NGO or as a citizen and taxpayer? I want to know where our money goes and the authorities are obliged to give account to the taxpayers. The public practices in the current moment show a variety of tricks which aim to discourage citizens who have searched public information. When leaning on the Access to Public Information Act provisions we prove that we are right, I hope that the officials’ attitudes will change as well. In the end, I believe that the time will come when the local authorities and the Mayor of Razgrad will tell us everything they are obliged to, without even asking them. January 2005
[1] With the adoption of the Administrative Procedure Code in 2006, access to information cases fall under the jurisdiction of newly created administrative courts as of March 1, 2007. Before that access to information cases were heard by the Regional Courts.
This case is part of the book "Civil Participation and Access to Information (15 Years of the APIA, 37 stories of NGOs)" published by AIP within the implementation of the project “Enhancing the Capacity of Nongovernmental Organizations to Seek Public Information” supported with a grant under the NGO Programme in Bulgaria under the Financial Mechanism of the European Economic Area 2009 – 2014 (www.ngogrants.bg). The whole responsibility for the content shall be taken by the Access to Information Programme Foundaiton and it cannot be assumed under any circumstances that the document reflects the official stance of the Financial Mechanism of the European Economic Area and the Operator of the Programme for NGO support in Bulgaria.
HOME | ABOUT US | APIA | LEGISLATIVE BASE | LEGAL HELP | TRAININGS | PUBLICATIONS | FAQ | LINKS English Version Last Update: 17.02.2016 © 1999 Copyright by Interia & AIP |