The Basic Court in Pristina has found that an investigation is not an automatic reason for refusing access to public documents.
The INPO organization has announced that the Administrative Affairs Department of this Court has ruled in its favor by annulling the decision of the Information and Privacy Agency (AIP), which had refused access to public documents on the grounds that "the case is under investigation."
Support the TIME. Preserve the truth.
Professional journalism is in the public interest. Your support helps it remain independent and credible. Contribute too. 1 euro makes a difference.
Letter to the Reader — Why We're Asking for Your Support Contribute"The court found that the investigation is not an automatic reason for refusing access and that any restriction must be specifically justified, passing the test of harm and public interest, as required by the Law on Access to Public Documents," an INPO announcement of the decision states.
It further states that this is not an isolated case. "In a significant number of other cases, the AIP has closed or restricted access to public documents by citing the same basis: 'the case is under investigation', without individual analysis and without sufficient justification," the announcement states.
INPO has assessed that this judgment sets a clear standard: "restriction of access cannot be done automatically, but only after a concrete, proportionate and reasoned assessment."
"It serves as a guiding basis for how these cases should be handled, both procedurally and on the merits, and reinforces the constitutional right to access public documents," the announcement states.