«Η ΦΙ δεν μπορεί να προσυπογράψει την ερμηνεία που δόθηκε στον ιδιαίτερα ευαίσθητο χαρακτήρα, ούτε στο ιδιαίτερα ευρύ περιεχόμενο».

Transcription

1 ΣΥΜΒΟΥΛΙΟ ΤΗΣ ΕΥΡΩΠΑΪΚΗΣ ΕΝΩΣΗΣ Βρυξέλλες, 3 Απριλίου 2009 (06.04) (OR. en) 7710/09 INF 57 API 31 JUR 147 ΣΗΜΕΙΩΜΑ ΣΗΜΕΙΟΥ «I/Α» της : Ομάδας «Πληροφόρηση» προς : την ΕΜΑ (2ο τμήμα) / το Συμβούλιο αριθ. προηγ. εγγρ. : 7708/09 Θέμα : Πρόσβαση του κοινού στα έγγραφα - Επιβεβαιωτική αίτηση 06/c/01/09 Επισυνάπτεται για τις αντιπροσωπίες σχέδιο απάντησης του Συμβουλίου στην επιβεβαιωτική αίτηση 06/c/01/09, όπως προέκυψε από την εξέταση στην οποία προέβη η Ομάδα εργασίας «Πληροφόρηση» κατά τη συνεδρίασή της στις 2 Απριλίου Η δανική, η ολλανδική, η φινλανδική, η σλοβενική και η σουηδική αντιπροσωπία δήλωσαν ότι θα καταψηφίσουν το σχέδιο απάντησης και προέβησαν στις εξής δηλώσεις: ΦΙ: «Η ΦΙ δεν μπορεί να προσυπογράψει την ερμηνεία που δόθηκε στον ιδιαίτερα ευαίσθητο χαρακτήρα, ούτε στο ιδιαίτερα ευρύ περιεχόμενο». ΣΝ: «Η σλοβενική αντιπροσωπία δεν θεωρεί ότι η δημοσιοποίηση του εγγράφου αυτού θα υπονόμευε την προστασία των νομικών συμβουλών». ΣΔ: «Η πρόταση αντιτίθεται στην απόφαση της υπόθεσης Turco. Δεν υφίσταται πραγματικός κίνδυνος, ο οποίος να είναι ευλόγως προβλέψιμος και όχι απλώς υποθετικός, ότι η δημοσιοποίηση του αιτούμενου εγγράφου θα υπονόμευε την προστασία των νομικών υποδείξεων κατά την έννοια της δεύτερης περίπτωσης του άρθρου 4 παράγραφος 2. Συνεπώς, θα πρέπει να δημοσιοποιηθεί το σύνολο του εγγράφου». 7710/09 KM/γομ 1 DG F EL

2 Η πλειοψηφία των αντιπροσωπιών συμφώνησε να δημοσιευθεί το αποτέλεσμα της ψηφοφορίας. Καλείται συνεπώς η Επιτροπή των Μόνιμων Αντιπροσώπων να εισηγηθεί στο Συμβούλιο, στην προσεχή σύνοδό του: - να σημειώσει τη συμφωνία για το συνημμένο σχέδιο απάντησης στα σημεία «Α», με αρνητική ψήφο της δανικής, της ολλανδικής, της φινλανδικής, της σλοβενικής και της σουηδικής αντιπροσωπίας, - να αποφασίσει τη δημοσίευση του αποτελέσματος της ψηφοφορίας. Το παράρτημα είναι διαθέσιμο μόνο στην αγγλική /09 KM/γομ 2 DG F EL

3 ΠΑΡΑΡΤΗΜΑ DRAFT REPLY ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL ON... TO CONFIRMATORY APPLICATION 06/c/01/09 made by on 17 March 2009, pursuant to Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, for public access to document 6644/06 The Council has considered this confirmatory application under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (OJ L 145 of , p. 43) and Annex II to the Council s Rules of Procedure (Council Decision 2006/683/EC, Euratom - OJ L 285 of , p. 47) and has come to the following conclusion: 1. The applicant refers to document 6644/06, an opinion of the Legal Service of the Council concerning a proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the assessment and management of floods. 2. In its reply dated 10 March 2009, the General Secretariat granted public access to paragraphs 1-7 of the document. Access to the remaining parts was refused pursuant to Article 4(2), second indent, of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (protection of legal advice). 3. In his confirmatory application, the applicant claims that the legal advice contained in the requested concerns a «groundbreaking» issue in legal writing which should be dealt with in open academic discourse. The applicant also states that he requests full access to the document for purely academic purposes. Furthermore, he contends that the requested document should not be refused for reason of containing personal data. 4. The Council has examined the above-mentioned document in the light of the applicant s arguments: 7710/09 ΚΜ/γομ 3

4 5. The requested document contains internal legal advice by the Council Legal Service intended for the members of the Council, given in the context of the examination of a Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the assessment and management of floods. In its examination, the Legal Service examines the powers of the Community legislator under Articles 175(1) and 175(2) EC, as modified by the Treaty of Nice, to adopt measures on the assessment and management of floods, as proposed by the Commission. 6. As the applicant contends, the issue analysed in the requested document is novel; furthermore, there exists no case-law on the distinction between 175(1) and 175(2) EC, following modification by the Treaty of Nice, in order to guide the legislator s choice of the legal basis. In view of the novelty of the doctrine suggested by the Legal Service in the requested document and the particular relevance of this reasoning in forthcoming discussions in the area, the Council considers that the legal advice is particularly sensitive in nature and its disclosure would be highly detrimental to the capacity of the Council to request and obtain frank, objective and comprehensive legal advice in an area where the legal doctrine is novel and consequently, where there exists an increased risk of litigation. 8. The possibility that the legal advice in this sensitive area be disclosed to the public may lead the Council to lose all interest in requesting written opinions from its Legal Service, since it could find itself in a situation where it would be confronted - in an action on the validity of the legal act it adopted - with an advice given by its Legal Service during the decision-making process. Moreover, the very fact for the Legal Service to consider the possibility that an internal legal advice intended exclusively for the members of the Council in a delicate area could be released to the public, could affect the way in which legal opinions are drafted and hence prejudice the possibility of the Legal Service to express its views in a free and independent manner. Lastly, disclosure of the legal advice would also affect the ability of the Legal Service to effectively defend the decision taken by the Council before the Community courts. 9. The Council wishes to clarify that the requested document does not contain any personal data whose erasure would enable it to release the contents of the document without the risk of undermining the protection of legal advice. 7710/09 ΚΜ/γομ 4

5 10. The Council understands the applicant s interest in inspecting the document for the purposes of his academic research. However, this does not, in the Council s view, point to the existence of an overriding public interest in disclosure; indeed it is not possible to grant the applicant privileged access to the document, since the Council is obliged, when releasing the document, to do so erga omnes, in conformity with Article 10(2) of Annex II of its Rules of Procedure. 11. In the light of the above and in the absence of any other elements pointing to an overriding public interest in disclosure, the Council concludes that the institution s interest in receiving frank, objective and comprehensive legal advice outweighs the applicant s interest in full disclosure of the document and therefore confirms the General Secretariat s decision, set out in its reply to the applicant of 10 March 2009, granting public access to paragraphs 1-7 of the document and refusing access to the remaining parts refused pursuant to Article 4(2), second indent, of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (protection of legal advice) /09 ΚΜ/γομ 5