People v. Ministry of Justice and Security and others

City of Buenos Aires, 2019

Authority:
Órgano Garante de Acceso a la Información Pública

Country/State:
City of Buenos Aires

Case title:
People v. Ministry of Justice and Security and others

Official citation:
RESOL-2018-06-GCABA-OGDAI

Date of decision:
05/18/2019

Relevant law:
Act 104

Decision:
OGDAI ordered the Ministry of Justice and Security and others to provide most of the information requested. OGDAI rejected the rest of the claims based on the fact that the information required was protected by the public security exception.

Key words:
Access to information – public security exception – public interest test

Case Summary:
1.   Facts

A group of people lodged 8 complaints before OGDAI on the basis that the administration did not respond adequately to 48 information requests —many of which were in fact a repetition or extension of previous unanswered information requests— concerning the specific measures that had been taken by Buenos Aires City Government to fight insecurity in certain neighborhoods. With regard to a large amount of the information required, the Ministry of Justice and Security alleged the application of the public security exception in order to deny its disclosure.

2. Decision

OGDAI ordered the Ministry of Justice and Security and others to provide most of the information requested. OGDAI rejected the rest of the claims based on the fact that the information required was protected by the public security exception.

Note (Optional):
OGDAI commented on procedural issues concerning the interpretation of complaints and how to compute the statutory time period for lodging them. Its decision on the merits revolved around the legitimate use of the public security exception. First of all, OGDAI noted that the imposition of any limitation on the right to information should be well-founded. In order to guarantee the correct application of the public security exception, OGDAI stated that only public authorities in charge of ensuring security can allege it and that they need to demonstrate that the restriction is placed by law and that it is necessary and appropriate in a democratic society, which means a) there should be a reasonable likelihood of the disclosure of the information required posing a real risk to public security; b) it is the least harmful way in terms of rights of preventing that risk; c) the general interest in disclosing the information required does not outweigh said risk (public interest test). OGDAI also referred to certain categories of information that are prima facie protected because their close link with the promotion of public debate.

Resource:
https://www.buenosaires.gob.ar/sites/gcaba/files/resol-2018-6-ogdai.pdf