collezione peuterey CASE OF YOUTH INITIATIVE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS v
48135/06) against the Republic of Serbia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a non governmental organisation based in Belgrade, Youth Initiative for Human Rights (“the applicant”), on 29 November 2006. Drobnjak, a lawyer practising in Belgrade. The Serbian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr S. Cari. It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article 29 1). It monitors the implementation of transitional laws with a view to ensuring respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The agency appealed, but on 19 April 2006 the Supreme Court of Serbia held that it lacked standing and dismissed its appeal. 120/04, amendments published in Official Gazette nos. 54/07, 104/09 and 36/10) has been in force since 13 November 2004. The relevant provisions of the Act read as follows:
“Everyone shall have the right to access information of public interest by being allowed to examine a document containing that information, by being entitled to make a copy of that document, and by being entitled to receive a copy of that document on request, by post, fax, electronic mail or otherwise.”
“The rights provided for in this Act may, in exceptional circumstances, be subject to limitations set out in this Act,
to the extent necessary in a democratic society to prevent a serious violation of a prevailing interest based on the Constitution or law. Article 19 of that Covenant guarantees freedom of expression in similar terms to those used in Article 10 of the Convention. In July 2011 the Human Rights Committee, the body of independent experts set up to monitor the implementation of that treaty, reiterated in its General Comment No. 34 that Article 19 of the Covenant embraced a right of access to information held by public bodies (document CCPR/C/GC/34 of 12 September 2011, 18). It further stated that such information included records held by a public body, regardless of the form in which the information was stored, its source and the date of production (ibid.). Lastly, the Human Rights Committee emphasised that when a State party imposed restrictions on the exercise of freedom of expression, these may not put in jeopardy the right itself; in other words, the relation between right and restriction and between norm and exception must not be reversed (see 21 of that document).
to information is a citizens’ right. As a result, the procedures for accessinginformation should be simple, rapid and free or low cost.
The access to information law should, to the extent of any inconsistency, prevail overother legislation.
Those requesting information should have the possibility to appeal any refusals todisclose to an independent body with full powers to investigate and resolve suchcomplaints. This should include provision forsanctions for those who wilfully obstruct access to information. Steps should also betaken to promote broad public awareness of the access to information law.
Steps should be taken, including through the allocation of necessary resources andattention, to ensure effective implementation of access to information legislation.