Tag Archive for: Access to Information

,

The Superior Court of Justice reviews the judgment of the Chamber and grants our request to access public information

On April 17, the Superior Court of Justice ruled in favor of a cassation appeal filed by Fundeps and Fundación Ciudadanos 365, through which they questioned the Chamber’s decision to reject the amparos for delay in accessing information. and for containing a limited conception of public information.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

The case

In 2010, the Administrative Appeals Chamber of the Second Nomination of Córdoba rejected nine appeals lodged by the organizations because of the failure to provide public information by various departments of the provincial Executive Power.

On that occasion, the foundations had submitted several requests for public information to the Executive Power of the province and the municipalities of Córdoba and Carlos Paz on finances and public procurement (contracting, bidding and funds of small boxes of the provincial Ministries). None of the requests was answered with the information requested nor were the legal deadlines met, so judicial safeguards were carried out due to default of the Administration in the terms of art. 8 Provincial Law 8803 on Right to Access to Knowledge of State Acts.

Said injunctions were rejected by the Chamber, with fundamentals that do not arise from the text or the spirit of Law 8803, and that even incur in the grounds for a ruling that contradicts previous decisions of the same Chamber. These foundations restricted the Right of Access to Public Information widely recognized by the Provincial, National Constitution and by the Inter-American System for the Protection of Human Rights.

On the one hand, the ruling contained a totally restrictive interpretation of the concept of “public information”, limiting it to that information linked to a specific administrative act that has already been dictated. In addition, it established that citizens could only control the management of public funds through the Legislature and the Court of Auditors, thus cutting off the space for active participation of citizens through a restricted conception of democracy. On the other hand, it omitted to carry out an analysis of the content of the information provided by the State, to verify whether it is “truthful, complete, adequate and timely” with respect to the information requested. Finally, it imposed the costs of the process on the information requester, making the judicial recourse used to access public information expensive.

To challenge this ruling, Fundeps and Fundación Ciudadanos 365 filed an appeal for cassation.

The judgment of the Superior Court of Justice

To begin with, the Superior Court recognizes the active legitimacy of the amparista organizations, adopting a broad notion of the right to information contemplated in local legislation (Law 8803) and in accordance with the provisions of the international treaties on human rights with constitutional hierarchy (cf. Arts 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 13.1, American Convention on Human Rights; 19.1, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, III, Inter-American Convention against Corruption and 13.1, Convention on the Rights of the Child). In short, it states that “the human right of access to public information must be analyzed from a broad and holistic point of view” and that “this right belongs to every person without having to show any interest or special legal status, receiving a broad legitimacy which includes both the action in administrative headquarters and in court. ” (Considering No. 14)

On the other hand, the judgment establishes that the individualization of an administrative act linked to the requested information is not necessary, since it does not arise as a requirement neither from the letter nor from the spirit of Law 8803. According to the Inter-American Court, a budget The basic principle of a democratic society is that all information held by the State is presumed to be public, accessible and subject to a limited regime of exceptions. (Considering No. 15)

Regarding the existence of legal limits to access information, the Court understands that “the causes that the Administration can evoke to refuse to provide information are truly exceptional and exhaustive, so that only those expressly provided by the Legislator can be admitted.” Therefore, if there is no exception exception explicitly stipulated in the legislation, “the principle according to which all information held by the State is presumed to be public, in order to guarantee access to data, control, is operative. citizenship and democratic participation.”(Considering No. 16)

Next, the judgment establishes that the lack of clarification of the presentation formulated at the time of requesting the information does not justify the refusal of the administration not to provide the information it has. Even when part of that required information finds limitations tending to avoid that sensitive information is provided about private and public persons in the power of the State, that is, limitations established to protect the confidentiality of the protected data and prevent the aggravation of third parties through access indiscriminate to the specific bases. Even in those cases, the Administration must inform about all the points that are not closed, that is, it must provide the information required in a partial manner (Considering No. 17).

We regret that this process has been extended for 9 years and that only now is guaranteed access to public information that we requested almost a decade ago. This situation draws attention to the standards and the way in which Law 8803 on the Right to Access to Knowledge is implemented to State acts. The Supreme Court uses standards both from the National Law on Access to Public Information and recommendations from human rights committees, which favors access to information. However, there are important aspects of provincial law that could be strengthened as well as public administration practices that should facilitate access to public information.

We celebrate that we have been guaranteed the right to access public information and the recognition by the Court that the State has a positive obligation to give the information that it has in its possession to its citizens. We understand that only through access to public information is it possible to exercise true citizen control of public administration and in the key of transparency.

Contact

Mayca Balaguer,  maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

,

More than 100 organizations are calling on EITI to publish environmental information

On the initiative of the Peruvian organization ‘Law, Environment and Natural Resources’, on February 25, a letter was presented to the Board of Directors for the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), demanding the publication of environmental information. More than 100 organizations in Latin America (including FUNDEPS), signed a letter asking the members of this initiative to make transparency in environmental information mandatory.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

The EITI standard for transparency in extractive activities, seeks to disseminate information on the oil, gas and mining industry. It requires the publication of information along the value chain of the extractive industry, from the point of extraction, to the way in which revenues continue on their way to the government; even how they benefit the general public. This includes how licenses are adjudicated and registered, who are the actual beneficiaries of those operations, what are the legal and fiscal provisions, how much is produced, how much is paid, how are those revenues distributed, and what is the contribution to the economy, including employment.

It is a multilateral initiative to which governments adhere voluntarily, and ensuring the participation of civil society and companies in the extractive sector.

However, and despite the imprint of this initiative, the standard currently lacks requirements on the obligation to publish information related to the costs and environmental impacts of extractive activity. It is necessary to have information, for example, on the amount of water that a mining project consumes, fines paid by corporations for environmental violations, information on environmental impact assessments, mitigation plans, among others. These data are crucial to avoid irreversible damage to the environment and the violation of the rights of those affected by extractive activity.

During the week of February 25, the EITI Board will meet in Kiev, Ukraine; to review the provisions of the current standard. Civil society organizations in Latin America sent a letter demanding that after the review process new guidelines be incorporated to ensure that:

  • Information is disseminated at the project level, in relation to all social and environmental assessments, showing the true impact of extractive activity on ecosystems and communities.

  • Environmental and social information about payments and expenses is disclosed, including impact studies, acquired rights, licenses, fines, compensations and remediation.
  • Information on all environmental licenses and authorizations, disaggregated by company and project, is disclosed. Including how the authorities monitor environmental commitments and information.


Argentina has officially joined EITI on February 27, 2019. To strengthen the standard with the demands made by civil society, would result in an improvement on the generation and publication of environmental information in our country.

More information

Sitio WEB de EITI

Carta enviada al Directorio de EITI

Environmental Reporting: Key to Transparency

Contact

Agustina Palencia, agustinapalencia@fundeps.org

 

,

Court filings for contamination in Chacra de la Merced

“A continuación, ofrecemos una versión de traducción de Google del artículo original en español. Esta traducción no es precisa pero sirve como una presentación general del artículo. Para más información, contactar directamente en inglés y/o español a la persona mencionada al final de este artículo con respecto a este tema “

From FUNDEPS we requested the participation as “Friend of the Court” and as private plaintiff in civil and criminal cases, respectively, initiated against a tannery that operated illegally at the height of km. 3 and 1/2 of the Chacra de la Merced road.

The past month of December formally presents an Amicus Curiae in the titled cars “Foundation of Third Generation C / Jolaga SRL – Environmental Protection”, (File 6229513) that is processed before the Civil and Commercial Court and the 45th Nomination of this city, for carry out the legal claims of the Court on the environmental damage caused by the contaminating activity of the JOLAGA tannery establishment SRL and the obligation that it has on it to recompose the environmental damage caused to the Suquía river.

The environmental protection initiated in February 2017 is aimed at the use of the activity developed for the establishment of wounds and the recomposition of the environmental damage caused.

All this is based on the illegal dumping of waste and residues in the Suquía River, on the Chacra de la Merced highway, km 3 1/2, by the establishment of JOLAGA SRL tanneries, owned by Jorge Ricardo Gawuryn and Ariel Gawuryn. , there has been a clear violation of the General Law of the Environment No. 25,675 and the Provincial Environmental Policy Law No. 10,208, which affects the rights of constitutional roots – right to a healthy environment – art. 41 CN -, right to health, right to life, not only of the population of the affected area but also of the entire community of the province of Córdoba.

In addition, due to the illegal and clandestine activity of possession, a criminal proceeding was initiated that culminated with the closure and with the imputation of tango owners JOLAGA SRL, Jorge Ricardo Gawuryn and Ariel Gawuryn, for the crime of continued environmental pollution, as co-authors, in accordance with the provisions of articles 55 of the Hazardous Waste Law 24,051, and 45 and 55 of the Criminal Code.

According to the investigation, the establishment operated almost ten years ago despite the complaining repetitions of the neighbors, throwing polluting substances into an open-air lagoon in the company’s facilities, and then they would have thrown them into an adjoining land, through of a pump drain. All these properties drain, by simple gravity, into the Suquía River.

As a foundation that promotes and encourages the realization of the right to a healthy and balanced environment, we consider that the contamination and environmental damage caused by the holders of privacy is a violation of these rights that we defend. For this reason, it requests the participation of a private prosecutor to promote the process and help the Public Prosecutor’s Office in the criminal investigation.

The neighborhood of Chacra de la Merced is located at the eastern end of the city of Córdoba, about 150 meters from Circunvalación Avenue and 200 meters from the Suquía River. For more than two decades it was part of the green belt of the city of Córdoba, today it has multiple sources of contamination. The worst thing is the Edar Bajo Grande wastewater treatment plant that has been dumping sewage into the Suquía River for years with poor treatment and even without treatment.

Other polluting industries are also sought, among them, such as JOLAGA SRL, quarries, lagoons produced by the extraction of aggregates converted into open air dumps, among others.

In this context almost 300 families live and the area has been declared in recent years in “environmental emergency” by the Municipality of Córdoba. However, there is no final non-compliance with the measures and actions provided, leaving the neighborhood forgotten in a “pollution river”.

In order to protect the fundamental rights of the residents of the neighborhood, a change of attitude was proposed to avoid impunity and the secrecy of this type of polluting activity. the mercy.

Source of images

La Voz del Interior

More Inforamtion

– Investigan contaminación con un carcinógeno en las cercanías de Suquía,  La Voz del Interior

–  Amicus curiae en causa “Fundación de Tercera Generación C / Jolaga SRL – Protección Ambiental”

– Demandante privado en causa “Acciones talladas arrojaron contaminantes cerca del río Suquía”

Contact

María Pérez Alsina – mariaperezalsina@fundeps.org