Public Defender Recommends Ministry of Justice and 11 Legal Entities of Public Law to Issue Public Information

Ombudsman.ge

On January 31, 2017, the Public Defender of Georgia addressed the Ministry of Justice and its 11 legal entities of public law with recommendations concerning the restrictions on the access to public information for the non-governmental organization Institute for Development of Freedom of Information (IDFI).

In its application to the Public Defender, the Institute for Development of Freedom of Information noted that in March, 2016, it requested information from the Ministry of Justice and its legal entities of public law about the remuneration, bonuses and supplements of the officials, as well as the number of the staff members and expenses related to visits, purchase of property and services, etc; However, all of the agencies ignored the request.

Within the framework of the case study, the requested information has been provided neither to the Public Defender's Office by the LEPL State Service Development Agency, LEPL Legislative Herald, LEPL House of Justice, LEPL National Enforcement Bureau, LEPL Data Exchange Agency, LEPL National Archives, LEPL Training Center of Justice, which represents a violation of Article 1734 of the Administrative Offense Code of Georgia. At the same time, the Ministry of Justice of Georgia, LEPL Smart Logic, LEPL National Agency for Civil Registry, LEPL Notary Chamber of Georgia and LEPL Crime Prevention Center provided the Public Defender's Office with information not requested by it (explanation about what was the basis for ignoring the request of the Institute for Development of Freedom of Information), but with documents containing the public information requested by the Institute for Development of Freedom of Information in March, 2016. 

According to the study results of the Public Defender's Office, since the Ministry of Justice and its legal entities of public law did not fulfill the obligation to issue public information, the Public Defender established the violation of the access to public information (freedom of information) and sent recommendations to the abovementioned agencies.