Claude-reyes v chile Flashcards
what was the main ruling in the case
violated the rights to freedom of expression, due process and judicial protection by refusing the applicants request to state held info without legal bases and didn’t give a justified reason in writing.
Chile had not proven that the restrictions imposed on the applicant responded to a legitimate purpose
what did they reason the request to be
in the public interest and had the purpose of exercising social control
why did they make the request
“so as to ensure the the maximum responsibiltiy of private companies in the context of major public investment promoted and authorised by the state and it’s institutional framework.”
wanted to know of the environemntal, social and financial aspects of it,
why did the state say they had no info
because the role of FIC was to verify that it complied with the legal requirments, and in order to refuse an individuals right must be affected
the commissions argument
art 13 should be seen as placing a positive obligation on public bodies
the right to access should be governed by the principle of disclosure
the committee never gave a response as to the missing info
the victims argument
the state justified the refusal by the fact that there was a legal vaccum as regards to the confidentiality of the info of the companies
the implicit recognition of the failure to investigate and the refusal of info by the comittee violate the right of access to info
the states argument
the specific characteristics of the investors were private info
when the request was made there was no law that regulated the disclosure of the acts
what is the obligtion of article 2
the elimination of any type of norm or practice that results in a violation of the guarantees established in the convention
why is democratic control needed
democratic control by society, through public opinion, fosters transparency in state activities and promotes the accountabiltiy of state officials.
what should the state be governed by
a principle of maximum disclosure
what other rights had there been a violation of?
the right to due process and judicial proceeding had been violated none of the decisions had been complied with
why was the info of PI
because it was between the state and 2 foreign companies
Access to state held info of PI can permit participation in public admin through the social control that can be exercised through such cases
“for the individual to be able to exercise democratic control, the state must guarantee acess to the info of PI that it holds”
how are restrictions valid under ACHR
be established by law
respond to one of the purposes allowed by the ACHR, this being - respect for the rights or reputations of others - the protection of national security, public order or public health or morals
be necessary in a democratic society
why was it a violation
not based on a law, as didn’t have laws regulating the info at the time. Also couldn’t say it was justified as didn’t give a reason in writing.
