WOB value

European Union

 
09/03
2009

EU:German court questions EU transparency initiative

The administrative court in the German city of Wiesbaden has questioned the initiative of the European Commission to disclose end-recipients of the European farmsubsidies.

 

 

On February 27th the court in Wiesbaden has sent its questions to the European Court of Justice to test, whether the new rules about publications of the names of end-recipients of EU farmsubsidies are consistent with the European rules about privacy and data protection.

 

According to the press release by the court, the new transparency rules are

not proportionate to the objective pursued, since the publication was not really necessary. The ECJ has in a similar case already decided that the purpose of transparency could be achieved by only the information communicated to the control organs or the total amounts would be released.

 

The farmers, who had brought the case, were happy about the courts decision to forward the question to the European Court of Justice, EJC.

The German Farmers Association DBV  repeatedly stressed that it was disproportionate that the data via the internet can be viewed worldwide. Also, it is impossible for the data as planned to be erased after two years. The DBV therefore urges the German Federal Republic and the provices to stop the publication immediately and no longer to publish economic data of farmers on the internet.

 

Data protection is a highly regarded fundamental right in Germany, where there is a need to demonstrate an overriding public interest before disclosure. The question by the German court follows an argument, that transparency is not a public objective in itself but only a means to achieve such an objective, and that the control of how public money is spent is sufficiently safeguarded by the EU control systems.The case thus has principal character, as it touches upon the relation between transparency and protection of privacy.

 

The German transparency initiative Wer Profitiert? in it's statement comments in a surprised tone: "If a company does not want its name mentioned as a recipient of the subsidies, it should not apply for them," they state.

Brigitte Alfter

 

 

 
 
 

FOI community

  • Liberia Announces Intention to Appoint FOI Commissioner | Freedom Info
    11/05 - 09:53 | FOI community
  • Sierra Leone Parliament to Consider FOI Next Week | Freedom Info
    04/05 - 10:55 | FOI community
  • Local Bodies Score Better in Georgia Access Study | Freedom Info
    24/04 - 10:01 | FOI community
  • Pleidooi voor een lekkende overheid - Analyse - De Nieuwe Reporter - Journalistiek & Nieuwe Media
    19/04 - 11:47 | FOI community
  • FoI debate: The genie of freedom will never be put back - Telegraph
    19/04 - 09:03 | FOI community
 

Tweets

  • robevansgdn: Ryan Giggs settles phone-hacking claim http://t.co/fW4zNGz4 via @guardian
    18/05 - 18:35 | United Kingdom - Rob Evans
  • robevansgdn: Ryan Giggs settles phone-hacking claim http://t.co/fW4zNGz4 via @guardian
    18/05 - 18:35 | United Kingdom - David Leigh
  • rosenbaum6: Lord Ashdown is 'insensitive' & 'belligerent' in his approach to House of Lords, acc to Lord Steel - more on Week in Westminster 1100 am Sat
    18/05 - 17:39 | United Kingdom - Martin Rosenbaum
  • robevansgdn: Communications green paper delayed while Jeremy Hunt deals with Leveson http://t.co/S45ov1iJ via @guardian
    18/05 - 14:21 | United Kingdom - Rob Evans
  • robevansgdn: Harold Evans tells Leveson of conflict and 'vindictive' atmosphere at Times http://t.co/AoApW7tY via @guardian
    18/05 - 14:21 | United Kingdom - Rob Evans