INTERVIEW WITH PLAMENKA BOJCHEVA, DIRECTOR OF THE AGENCY FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE RIGHT TO FREE ACCESS TO PUBLIC INFORMATION

Bojcheva: “We propose punishments for managers who do not provide information”

 

Author: Vasko Magleshov

 Five years after the new Law on Free Access to Public Information was adopted in 2019, a tool used by journalists, civil society organizations, and citizens to obtain data held by institutions, a working group was formed to change it.

The initiative comes from the Agency that protects the right to free access to public information, managed by Plamenka Bojcheva. These changes are proposed at a time when journalists and civil society organizations increasingly react to the fact that the institutions manipulate their requests and do not provide them with the information they have.

We spoke with Bojcheva about what the new legal amendments foresee, and how she views the closure of institutions.

BIRN: Ms. Bojcheva, at the Ministry of Justice, on your initiative, the first meeting of the working group for changing the Law on Free Access to Public Information was held. Why are the changes happening now and what do they predict?

-The law on free access to public information has been in force for 5 years. That period was more than enough to determine which provisions should be amended and supplemented to enable the best and most efficient realization and exercise of this basic human right, bearing in mind that the realization of this right largely depends on the realization of other human rights.

The working group includes representatives from the Agency, the Ministry of Justice, judges of the Administrative Court, as well as representatives from the non-governmental sector and journalists. The changes that we expect to be addressed are: shortening the period of 20 days; redefining the misdemeanour provisions and predicting misdemeanour provisions against managers and responsible persons; increasing competencies of the Agency in the direction of increasing the proactive transparency of information holders; introducing a special section in the Law regarding the environment; finding a solution for the situation with information holders who do not have their dedicated websites, etc.

These are the few basic proposals, for which we, from the Agency, believe that amendments and additions to the Law are necessary, and of course, as I have already emphasized, everything is aimed at a better, more expeditious and more efficient realization of the right of access to information in our country for which we received an assurance from the Ministry of Justice that it will be fulfilled.

Amendments and additions to the Law on Free Access to Public Information are provided in the National Strategy for Persons with Disabilities 2023-2030, the Transparency Strategy of the Government of the Republic of North Macedonia 2023-2026 and the Strategy for Public Administration Reform 2023-2030. In addition, in August this year, the Assembly of the Republic of North Macedonia ratified the Convention of the Council of Europe on access to official documents, which is why there is a need to harmonize domestic legislation with the provisions of the Convention.

BIRN: In the last period, the tendency to not respond to requests for free access from the institutions has increased, and in other cases, after the appeals have been accepted by the Agency, you receive lawsuits. What is the reason for this and is it possible to further close the institutions concerning the public?

– Unfortunately, the so-called “silence of the administration” is a problem that has been going on for years, and which, despite all the Agency’s attempts to overcome it, is still a real problem.

For illustration, out of a total of 298 appeals received in the Agency from January 1 to today (October 24, 2024), 212 or 71% were submitted due to non-action on requests for access to information.

But on the other hand, for 55 submitted appeals due to silence or approximately 26%, the procedure was stopped at the request of the applicant, because the requested information was received.

I would hereby like to emphasize that it is necessary to build an institutional culture and awareness of transparency among the holders of information, only in that way the subjective factor, that is, the change of the management structure, will not have an impact on the transparency, openness and accountability of the institutions.

One of the ways to overcome this negative tendency and to build an institutional culture and awareness is to establish internal procedures, both for acting upon a request for access to information and for active, self-initiated, timely and updated publication of the information that the holders create or with which they dispose as a result of the execution of the works and work tasks under their competence.

Regarding the lawsuits, which the holders of information submitted against the decisions of the Agency, instead of acting on them, it is practised with the sole purpose of delaying the publication of the requested information and/or reducing and losing interest in the requested information.

This is partly because the Administrative Court and the Higher Administrative Court have not built a consistent practice on whether the holders of information have active legal standing to file a lawsuit.

BIRN: Considering that more and more institutions choose to ignore the requests, and even when the Agency instructs them that they must respond, what are your suggestions to address this problem with the new amendments to the Law? What other measures, apart from increased penalties, can be introduced to guarantee access to public information?

The Administrative Court and the Higher Administrative Court should take a common position and introduce a consistent practice that the holders, as the first instance authorities in charge of acting on requests for access to information in administrative proceedings, cannot be plaintiffs, especially in proceedings where the realization of the public interest is of essential importance. From that point of view, I am glad that there are representatives from the Administrative Court in the working group for amendments to the Law.

Another proposal, as I have already mentioned, is the provision of misdemeanour sanctions for managers and responsible persons with information holders due to non-disclosure of information and denial of access to information. Transparency is one of the tools for combating corruption.