News from DG Disinformation Society: maladministration revisited

Posted on June 27, 2008 | Filed Under communication technologies 

Commissioner Reding likes to stress the “need for transparency” (in media pluralism), supports the aim “to ensure greater transparency“ (for roaming charges), worked on “issues of transparency” (in education and training), takes “measures to enhance transparency” (again: for roaming charges), and she even wants to “ensure the transparency” of the exchange of views between Commission and European Regulators Group (ERG). Maybe she should also check the performance of her Directorate General for Information Society: she could find a perfect case where increased transparency would be necessary.

I have already reported on a previous case where the EU Ombudsman found there was maladministration in DG Information Society. Now the Ombudsman closed another case, related to the first one, and again had to come to the conclusion that the Commission’s relevant behaviour “involves maladministration”.

It is a striking example of how not to deal with a request for access to a document: claiming that the document does not exist is a rather stupid action when the document had been e-mailed to at least dozens of people. When confronted with the document, obtained from other sources, the Commission said it had “believed bona fide” that there had been no such document, then “tried to retrieve the document from the place where such documents are usually saved” and “did not consult the CIRCA website” (where such documents are definitely always saved). 

“The Ombudsman notes that an institution’s factual statement that a document does not exist carries with it a (refutable) presumption of truthfulness. This presumption applies with respect to all those actors who may be involved in the context of applications for access to documents, be they citizens or other Community institutions. With regard to the Ombudsman specifically, the presumption of truthfulness is, first of all, based on the high level of trust that exists between all institutions and the Ombudsman with respect to the application of Regulation 1049/2001. … At the same time, the presumption of truthfulness implies a particularly strict duty of care to ensure the accuracy of statements regarding the non-existence of a document.”

Not surprisingly, the Ombudsman was not convinced that the Commission had complied with the duty of diligence in this case. And as to the “(refutable) presumption of truthfulness”. I may quote Shakespeare again: “That is too much presumption on thy part” (King Henry VI, part 2, Act V Scene 1)

PS: The Ombudsman also stated that “it would have been appropriate of the Commission to issue an apology to the complainant. The Commission has chosen not to do so”. I have to disclose that I was the complainant - but dear Commission, I do not need an apology, just more transparency (and, not to forget, truthfulness).

About this Post
author: hans peter | Permalink | | Print This Article |


Comments

One Response to “News from DG Disinformation Society: maladministration revisited”

  1. “Upon this warrant shall you have access”*: ECJ strengthens transparency : contentandcarrier on July 1st, 2008 12:42 pm

    […] News from DG Disinformation Society: maladministration revisited […]

Leave a Reply