A ruling by the First Instance Court of General Jurisdiction, Kentron and Nork-Marash Communities of Yerevan city, RoA, obliged the “Environmental project implementation unit” state agency to provide all the requested information regarding the bonuses and to compensate the legal fees, including state duty and attorney’s fees in the amount of AMD 63,500. Thus, another positive precedent has been added to legally enforcing freedom of information practices.
On May 29, 2012the Freedom of Information Center sent a written request to the “Environmental Project Implementation Unit” state agency to provide the following information:
Have the employees of the “Environmental Project Implementation Unit” state agency (SA) received any rewards (bonuses, gifts) in 2011?
If yes, who has been rewarded (by job positions) and by what amount (what gift)?
What was the total amount of monetary bonuses received by “Environmental project implementation unit” SA employees?
What was the monetary value of each gift and the total amount ofthe gifts expressed in monetary terms received by “Environmental project implementation unit” SA employees?
The state agency provided incomplete information, as it did not answer the questions 2 and 3. Therefore, FOICA repeated the inquiry on June 20, 2012, requesting to provide full and exhaustive information. In response to the second inquiry,on July 3, 2012 the “Environmental project implementation unit” SA provided an answer to the question 3, but refused to answer the question 2 on the premise that it contains information on employee personal data.
It has to be noted that FOICA had requested information on rewards to employees by their job positions, and not names, which demonstrates that the requested information was not related to personal privacy of the state agency’s individual employees.
Ultimately, on July 24, 2012 the Freedom of Information Center appealed to theFirst Instance Court of General Jurisdiction, Kentron and Nork-Marash Communities of Yerevan city, RoA, requesting to recognize the fact that Freedom of Information Center NGO’s right to receive information has been infringed and to oblige RoA Ministry of Nature Protection “Environmental project implementation unit” SA to provide the requested information.
In the November 23, 2012 ruling the Court found that providing the requested information does not violate the right to personal privacy of the state agency’s employees, since FOICA had requested information for job positions, rather than by names, and the state agency in fact could have provided the requested information without breaching its employees’ right to privacy of personal life. Hence, all information had to be provided.
