A Strong Case for Transparency: Public Interest in Disclosure of Risk Data P revails over Business Secrets

2006 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-21
Author(s):  
Jochen Gebauer ◽  
Ulrich Wollenteit ◽  
Michéle John
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Federal State ◽  
General Will ◽  
Modern Approach ◽  
Gm Plants ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Imminent Risk ◽  
Risk Policy

AbstractIn a dispute between Greenpeace Germany and Monsanto Europe concerning the confidentiality of its controversial rat feeding study the Higher Administrative Court of the federal State North Rhine-Westphalia (OVG Münster) refused to grant Monsanto an injunction to stop the German authorities from releasing the requested data to Greenpeace.' The decision has acknowledged the public's right to know and strengthened the principles of transparency and participation. On the grounds of a modern approach to risk policy and to genetically modified organisms (GMO), which the Court held to be enshrined in Article 25(4) of Directive 2001/18/EC, the Court has attributed the right to information priority over conflicting commercial interests. As far as risk data is concerned the Court stressed that European Law requires a maximum degree of transparency as an indispensable condition for the introduction of GM plants within Community territory. Furthermore, the decision recognised that in the field of genetic engineering law the right of companies to invoke operating or business secrets to justify exceptions to the right of access is narrowly circumscribed. Risk data, in general, will only be protected as 'confidential' on an exceptional basis. The party submitting the risk data has to prove that there is an imminent risk of specific and relevant harm to its commercial interests.

scholarly journals International legal guarantees for the realization of human and citizen rights to environmental information

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Butsmak Artem ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Information ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Legal Documents ◽  
Ecological Information ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
International Instruments ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
To Receive

In the article considered guarantees of the right on access to ecological information fixed in international legal documents. Also made a research on state of implementation such international instruments in national Ukrainian legislation, separate legal instruments of realization the right to get ecological information. Made examples of successful defence of the broken right on access to ecological information. In order to exercise the right to information, it is important not only to have the norms enshrined in the legislation, but also the system of guarantees and opportunities for their implementation, which should be provided by public authorities. International legal documents establish only general approaches to the protection of rights, and their further development and consolidation is undoubtedly entrusted to national authorities. The analysis of the current national legislation allows to state that in general the international legal norms have found the reflection in national regulatory legal acts. However, over time, approaches to understanding environmental information, expanding its list, the subjects who have the right to receive it, so work in this direction should continue in order to increase the possibility of exercising the right of access to such information. Keywords: ecolaw, right on access to ecological information, guarantees of right on access to ecological information, international guarantees of right on access to ecological information

scholarly journals Constitutionalizing Access

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Jessica Terkovich ◽  
Aryeh Frank
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Explicit Recognition ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Government ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
The U.S

State constitutions receive relatively little academic attention, yet they are the source of significant substantive rights—and, when compared to the U.S. Constitution, they are relatively easily amended to comport with contemporary needs and values. Unlike the constitutions of dozens of other nations, the U.S. Constitution contains no explicit recognition of a right to information from the government, and the Supreme Court has declined to infer that such a right exists, apart from narrow exceptions. Conversely, seven states expressly memorialize the public’s right of access to government meetings and records in their constitutions. In this paper, the authors examine case law applying the constitutional right of access, concluding that the right is somewhat underutilized and rarely seems to produce an outcome clearly different from what a litigant could expect relying on state statutory rights alone. 

Article 7 of the Directive 2012/13/EU on the Right to Information in Criminal Proceedings: A Missed Opportunity to Ensure Equality of Arms in Pre-Trial Proceedings?

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 126-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Pivaty ◽  
Anneli Soo
Keyword(s):  
Significant Role ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Member States ◽  
Early Access ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Missed Opportunity ◽  
The Eu

This article critically examines the EU law provisions on the right of access to the materials of the case in pre-trial criminal proceedings (Article 7 of Directive 2012/13/EU). It argues that they are insufficient to ensure adequate protection of this right in Member States. Furthermore, the approach chosen by EU legislator did not properly implement the European principle of the equality of arms in pre-trial proceedings. It is submitted that a clearer standard is needed to ensure an appropriate balance between the interests of adequate protection of individual rights and of protecting safety and security. It is suggested that although some room for national interpretation is desirable, the right of early access to the case materials should be endorsed by all Member States with derogations applied sparingly and under specific circumstances. Here further guidelines from the cjeu play significant role in order to ensure equality of arms in pre-trial proceedings.

Access to and Limits on Evidence Dossiers in Civil Law Systems

2019 ◽  
pp. 561-585
Author(s):  
Michele Caianiello
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

This chapter examines issues surrounding the right of access to and limits on evidence dossiers in civil law systems. It first provides an overview of the general aims pursued by the law in regulating the parties’ right of access to the investigative file before discussing supranational sources, such as the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the case law of the European Court on Human Rights (ECtHR). In particular, it explores how the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and certain directives adopted by the European Union on the right to information by defendants and by victims has influenced the criminal procedures of EU Member States. It also analyzes disclosure at the International Criminal Court (ICC) and concludes by explaining how civil law systems have changed in recent years, what their common features and shortcomings are, and how they could be improved.

The European Union and the Rights of Individuals in Criminal Proceedings

2019 ◽  
pp. 114-136
Author(s):  
Valsamis Mitsilegas
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Transformative Potential ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
The Eu

This chapter considers the secondary legislation that has been adopted by European Union institutions under Article 82(2) TFEU (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) in the field of procedural rights in criminal proceedings. Article 82(2) TFEU is included in the Lisbon Treaty conferring to the EU express competence to adopt minimum standards on criminal procedure. The chapter first provides an overview of the EU Directive on the right to interpretation and translation, the right to information, the right of access to a lawyer, the right to legal aid, procedural rights of children, and presumption of innocence. It then discusses some of the key challenges in reaching agreement on EU standards on procedural rights in criminal proceedings, before concluding with an analysis of the transformative potential of EU law on procedural rights when viewed within the broader constitutional and institutional context of the EU.

scholarly journals The Right to Information Act in Bangladesh: An Analysis in the Light of Johannesburg Principles of Freedom of Information Legislation

IIUC Studies ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 73-90
Author(s):  
Mohammad Hasan Murad ◽  
Kazi Arshadul Hoque
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Knowledge Based ◽  
The People ◽  
Democratic State ◽  
The Right To Know ◽  
Information Law ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

Today's knowledge based world is now resonating with the call for meaningful democracy backed by transparency and accountability in the state engine and people’s right of access to information has gained a great importance. In a modern democratic state, the right to information, more popularly described as the ‘right to know,’ is an indispensable prerequisite. There is no denying the fact that the notion of freedom of thought, of conscience, of speech and rule of law become worthless if the people are deprived of access to information. There appears to have been a universal recognition of the demand and necessity for the establishment of people’s right of access to information. The experience in other countries suggests that this scenario can be changed by empowering people with right to information or freedom of information. The translation of right to information into law has to be done considering a number of principles which are required to be addressed in the law. The article presents an overview of the concept of right to information and attempts to discuss the principles underpinning right to information along with an analysis of to what extent those principles are reflected in the right to information law of Bangladesh. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/iiucs.v7i0.12261 IIUC Studies Vol.7 2011: 73-90

Level of Awareness on the Right to Information Act, 2005 Among Beneficiaries in Selected Districts of Rajasthan

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-120
Author(s):  
Harendra Singh ◽  
◽  
Dr. S.S. Chouhan Dr. S.S. Chouhan ◽  
Dr. Sonia Dutt Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right

Proposing a Way to Develop the Substantive Content of the Right of Access to Adequate Housing: An Alternative to the Reasonableness Review Model

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-93
Author(s):  
Gustav Muller
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Municipal Services ◽  
International Convention ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
Convincing Case ◽  
Close Proximity ◽  
Review Model ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

In this article an attempt is made to put forward a convincing case for giving substantive content to the right of access to adequate housing and looks towards relevant international law elaborations on the meaning of this right as contained in the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). It does so while being aware of the Constitutional Court’s prior rejection of an international law-based minimum core interpretation of the right and opting, instead, for the so-called model of reasonableness breview. Given that the court has so expressly taken and stuck to this stance, it is argued in the article that an international law-based substantive interpretation of the right is possible – given that South Africa has recently ratified the ICESCR – and that it is preferable given the shortfalls of the model of reasonableness review. The article further highlights what difference the preferred reading of section 26(1) would make as to how courts ‘interpret’ reasonableness, that is, how courts review compliance with section 26 at present if ‘adequate’ housing is understood as having security of tenure and access to basic municipal services; is affordable, habitable and accessible; is located in close proximity to social facilities; and is culturally adequate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document