Access to public information - western european experiences and the case of several jurisdictions from Central and Eastern Europe

Dacian Dragos¸ 1999-ben szerzett mesterdiplomát államigazgatásból, majd három évre rá a Babes Bolyai Egyetemen PhD-fokozatot közigazgatási jogból. Jelenleg a román Közigazgatási Minisztérium tanácsadója, a román közigazgatási törvénykönyv szerkesztõbizottságának elnöke és a Babes Bolyai Egyetem államigazgatási tanszékének egyetemi docense. A cikk hosszasan taglalja a közigazgatás átláthatóságát, kiváltképpen a közérdekû információkhoz való hozzájutást. Az európai tapasztalatok nagyon különbözõek e téren. A skála az évszázadok óta nyitott kormányzást folytató országoktól (pl.: Svédország) az olyan demokráciákig (pl.: Egyesült Királyság) terjed, ahol csak mostanában fogadták el és alkalmazzák a kormányzati szférát érintõ, liberalizált információ-szolgáltatást. Ez a téma az új közép- és kelet- európai demokráciák esetében még inkább fontos, ahol a modern államigazgatási rendszer létrehozása során fõ kihívásként jelent meg a nyitottság kérdése. A tanulmány bemutatja az információs rendszerek liberalizáltságát néhány európai uniós ország jogrendszerében és Romániában. Minden Közép-Európában újonnan létrejött demokrácia hasonló problémákkal került szembe, mégpedig a kormányzat átláthatóságának és nyitottságának hiányával. Sajnos a nyugati országok gyakorlata nem ad kész mintát az új demokráciáknak e téren, mivel ezen országokban a közérdekû információkhoz való hozzájutás irányításában sajátságos problémák merülnek fel. Mindamellett a nyugati társadalmakban hangsúlyosabb a civil szféra részvétele a közügyekben. A szerzõ végezetül egy információs biztosi poszt létrehozását javasolja, ami pozitív hatást gyakorolna a jogszabályok megismerése és ér- telmezése tekintetében, amivel hozzájárulna ahhoz, hogy megszûnjön az információnak "titokként" való besorolása. --------- The article dwells on the issue of transparency in public administration, particular- ly the free access to public information. The European experience in this matter is very different, ranging from countries with centuries of openness in government, like Swe- den, to democracies which have adopted only recently freedom of information provi- sions (United Kingdom). The issue is even more important in new democracies from Central and Eastern Europe, where the transition to a modern public administration faces also challenges regarding openness. Taking into account all these realities, the study presents the state of the art of the freedom of information regime in several juris- dictions from European Union and in Romania

Public Participation in Environmental Decision Making in Romania

This article researches the manner in which the participation pillar from the Aarhus Convention was transposed into Romanian legislation and how its provisions were applied to a highly controversial case. Thus, the paper will firstly address the general legal framework concerning participation in environmental matters as well as the challenges for the implementation of Aarhus Convention, followed by requirements for effective participation and NGOs involvement in the process. The main conclusion drawn is that public participation is generally seen only as a bureaucratic requirement that both authorities and the developer must meet before the project is adopted. In this context, the NGOs play a crucial role by acting as a real watchdog in identifying deficiencies in the application of the Convention. In order for enhancing implementation the authors emphasize the more proactive role that public authorities should have both with regard to the quality of environmental reports and with applying sanctions coupled with a stronger cooperation with the NGOs in the field.    

The indirect review of administrative action in search of a fair balance between legality and legal certainty

In this introductory chapter, we present the aim and structure of the edited collection as well as its main findings. We first sketch the scope and rationale of the system of indirect judicial review, then we move to examine the bodies which can indirectly review the administrative action as well as (procedural) workings of the mechanism. Subsequently, we try to provide some insights into the concrete operation and current use of the system of indirect review. We finally move to discussing the notion of indirect review of administrative action as a tool to balance legality and legal certainty and draw some conclusions on the existence of a ‘common core’ in Europe when it comes to the system of indirect review of administrative action

Reusing Public Sector Information - Policy Choices and Experiences in some of the Member States with an emphasis on the Case of Romania

The paper addresses the issue of the commercial reuse of public sector information (PSI) and analyzes from a comparative perspective various reuse regimes to be considered by national legislators. Directive 2003/98/EC provides at the EU level the policy context in which the Member States operate with regard to reuse.The paper has a threefold structure: The first section discusses mainly theoretical issues regarding the establishment of a PSI reuse model and tries to highlight several alternatives countries have and how a certain alternative influences the growth and future development of the PSI market; the second section analyzes the provisions of the Directive 2003/98/EC on PSI reuse and discusses how this Directive was transposed into national legislation by some of its 'older' members; Finally, the third part focuses on the case of Romania and provides an in-depth analysis of the provisions of the reuse law. It tries to highlight practical challenges and ways in which they could be overcome.transparency; access to documents; directives; law; political science; public administration; Romania; U.K.; Belgium; France

Regulating and Implementing Freedom of Information Regimes in the New Eu Member States: a Comparative Analysis of Romania, Hungary and the Czech Republic

<p>This article addresses the issue of freeaccess to public information in some of the newEuropean Union member states from a comparativeperspective and tries to highlight some of the bestpractices in this field that were incorporated oradapted by these countries. It is noted that veryoften the choice of policy of national governmentswas determined by past experiences and existingmentalities (see, for example, protection of businessdata). A sizable part of the analysis is dedicated toexceptions from the rule of free access to publicdocuments. This aspect is important becausesome of the exclusions leave room for the abuseof public bodies already reluctant to disclose publicdata. Some considerations regarding the ways inwhich appeals against the refusal of access areorganized were also presented as being relevantto the topic discussed. The last section of thepaper focuses on an issue related to free accessto public information—namely, the commercialreuse of public data. A distinction needs to be madebetween the two concepts, because they are usuallygoverned by different regimes and regulations. Theauthors conclude that, although the jurisdictionsexamined have relatively progressive legislationregarding free access to public sector information,most challenges occur in practice with regard toimplementation.</p><p> </p><p> </p

Resilience in Times Of Pandemic: Is the Public Procurement Legal Framework Fit for Purpose?

This article aims to analyze whether the legislation enacted in the field of public procurement in Romania, based on the 2014 EU Directives, is effective in fostering resilience of the public institutions and indirectly of communities, and to provide a fit-for-purpose mechanism for dealing with the pandemic generated by the new type of coronavirus, Sars-CoV-2. The article discusses the necessity of new rules meant to promote swiftly purchases during the state of emergency.Undoubtedly, the pandemic generated crisis has raised some serious challenges to which public procurement regulations is in principle properly equipped to deal with: urgent need for supplies, works and services, but also unemployment or protection of other disadvantaged categories of people. We argue that resorting to specific tools (negotiated procedures, framework-agreements, centralized procurement, sustainable and social procurement, reserved contracts) when carrying out swift interventions generated by the pandemic would have been more suitable during this health crisis or even for preventing the effects of this pandemic. Instead, the attention of the legislator has been concentrated only on (unnecessarily) exempting the swift purchases of medical equipment from the rule of law.</p