ICIC Working Group
Law Cases Working Group
The Working Group supports international learning through the collection and exchange of access-to-information decisions, legal approaches and practical case experience.
Objective
The Working Group promotes knowledge sharing on important access-to-information cases and decisions. Its work helps oversight authorities compare legal approaches, identify common principles and exchange good practices across jurisdictions.
Coordinators
Coordinator information is currently listed as in progress on the source page.
Member Authorities
| Country or Jurisdiction | Authority or Body |
|---|---|
| Albania | Information and Data Protection Commissioner |
| Argentina | Guarantor Body of the Right of Access to Information of the City of Buenos Aires |
| Brazil | National Secretariat of Access to Information, Office of the Comptroller General |
| Germany | Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information |
| Hungary | National Authority for Data Protection and Freedom of Information |
| Mexico City | Institute for Transparency, Access to Public Information, Personal Data Protection and Accountability |
| Peru | Court of Transparency and Access to Public Information |
| Philippines | Freedom of Information – Project Management Office |
| Portugal | Comissão de Acesso aos Documentos Administrativos |
Activities and Products
Legal Systems Report
The report examines similarities and differences between legal systems and supports the development of non-binding administrative criteria for access-to-information decisions.
View Spanish Report →Relevant Cases Repository
The repository brings together selected decisions from different jurisdictions to support comparative learning and the exchange of legal practice.
List of Cases
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
text
Country/State:
text
Case title:
text
Official citation:
text
Date of decision:
text
Relevant law:
text
Decision:
text
Key words:
text
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
Text
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection
Country/State:
Serbia
Case title:
Journalist v. Public Prosecutor (First Basic Public Prosecutor)
Official citation:
071-01-3890/2018-03
Date of decision:
26.12.2018.
Relevant law:
Anti-corruption Agency Act, Criminal Procedure Code
Decision:
The authority should provide the applicant with access to information regarding its decision to cease criminal investigation of the then Mayor of Belgrade on the failure to report and/or giving false information on property in accordance with the Anti-corruption Agency Act.
Public authority decision to reject access to information is overruled;
Key words:
Public officials, investigation exemption, criminal prosecution
Case Summary:
1. Facts
The Prosecutor denied access to information based on the exemption that allowing access to information would jeopardise indictment of a criminal offence, pretrial proceedings, or unbiased treatment and a fair trial, since the Mayor submitted all information during the processing of Anti-corruption Agency’s charges, while the Prosecutor decided to defer criminal prosecution and the Mayor paid the requested sum to the benefit of humanitarian purposes, as provided for by Criminal Procedure Code. The prosecutor added that access to its decision to reject the criminal charges filed by Anti-corruption Agency, could jeopardise possible criminal procedure.
2. Decision
In his decision Commissioner noted the public interest to know the reasoning behind the Prosecutor’s decision to reject criminal charges filed by a public authority in its legal capacity against a public, and important political, figure. The case was intensely reported in the media. With regard to the notion of possible criminal procedure the Commissioner rejected the argument as the exemption could refer to an ongoing procedure and not hypothetical one. The Commissioner concluded that the Prosecutor failed to show that allowing access to information would cause legal or other harms to legitimate interests, without prejudice to any future investigation following the knowledge of new facts.
Note (Optional):
Resource:
The case is in brief noted in Commissioner’s annual report for year 2018, available on website www.poverenik.rs (in Serbian only).
Authority:
Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación
Country/State:
Argentina
Case title:
La Corte ordenó al Estado Nacional que haga pública información relacionada con los planes sociales que administra
Official citation:
CIPPEC c/ EN – M° Desarrollo Social – dto. 1172/03 s/ amparo ley 16.986
Date of decision:
26 de marzo de 2014.
Decision:
La Corte Suprema de Justicia ordenó al Estado Nacional -Ministerio de Desarrollo Social- brindar la información íntegra requerida por la ONG -CIPPEC-, referida a planes sociales de asistencia a la comunidad que el Ministerio demandado administra. Así, y en atención a lo resuelto por el Tribunal, el Ministerio de Desarrollo Social de la Nación deberá dar a conocer el modo en que ejecuta el presupuesto público asignado por el Congreso de la Nación específicamente respecto de estos programas.
Key words:
Acceso a la información; ejecución presupuestaria; planes sociales; datos personales
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
En el fallo se sostiene que el fundamento central del acceso a la información en poder del Estado consiste en el derecho que tiene toda persona de conocer la manera en que sus gobernantes y funcionarios públicos se desempeñan. La Corte afirmó que la información pertenece a las personas, no es propiedad del Estado y el acceso a ella no se debe a una gracia o favor del gobierno. Este tiene la información solo en cuanto representante de los individuos. El Estado y las instituciones públicas están comprometidos a respetar y garantizar el acceso a la información a todas las personas. Asimismo, se afirmó que el Estado está en la obligación de promover una cultura de transparencia en la sociedad y en el sector público, de actuar con la debida diligencia en la promoción del acceso a la información, de identificar a quienes deben proveer la información, y de prevenir los actos que lo nieguen y sancionar a sus infractores.
Note (Optional):
Así, se entendió que los datos solicitados, debidamente evaluados por CIPPEC, constituyen una herramienta fundamental para que el pulso vivo y crítico de la esfera pública contribuya a determinar si la instrumentación de las políticas sociales establecidas por el Estado contribuye efectivamente o es disfuncional a los fines perseguidos.
Authority:
Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación
Country/State:
Argentina
Case title:
La Corte Suprema reconoció el derecho de los ciudadanos de acceso a la información pública
Official citation:
AsociaciónDerechosCiviles c/ EN – PAMI – (dto.1172/03) s/ amparo ley 16.986
Date of decision:
4 de diciembre de 2012
Decision:
La Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación ordenó al Instituto Nacional de Servicios Sociales para Jubilados y Pensionados –PAMI- a brindar información relativa a su presupuesto del 2009 de publicidad oficial, así como su distribución en mayo y junio de ese año, que había sido requerida por la Asociación por los Derechos Civiles (ADC).
Key words:
acceso a la información; ejecución presupuestaria; publicidad oficial
Case Summary:
1. Facts
2. Decision
El Máximo Tribunal –con la firma de todos sus ministros- rechazó un recurso extraordinario que había presentado el PAMI contra un fallo de la Cámara Nacional en lo Contencioso Administrativo Federal que hizo lugar a la acción de amparo iniciada por la ONG.
