Right to Access Information Legislative Framework (HR0010)

Amendments to the Act on the Right of Access to Information Implementation indicators: Adoption at the Government session of the Proposal of the Act on Amendments to the Act on the Right of Access to Information, in line with Directive 2013/37/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 amending Directive 2003/98/EC on the re-use of public sector information. Lead institutions: Ministry of Administration Supporting institutions: Information Commissioner Start date: Not specified, End date: July 2015. Legal regulation of records of exclusive rights to reuse Implementation indicators: adoption of implementing regulations (Ministry of Administration) drafted and publically available records of exclusive rights for re-use (Information Commissioner) Lead institutions: Ministry of Administration, Information Commissioner Supporting institutions: Not specified Start date: Not specified, End date: December 2015; Amendments to the Act on Data Confidentiality Implementation indicators: Adoption at the Government session of the Proposal of Amendments of the Act on Data Confidentiality which: outlines in detail the persons subject to application of the Act; further emphasises the importance of differentiating classified data from other types of confidentiality (business secrets, professional secrets, etc.); introduces centralised access to the manner of determining the criteria for data classification; clearly defines the definitions from this area, particularly in relation to unclassified data and declassification procedures; clearly defines cases in which the test of proportionality and public interest are carried out; introduction of revised rules for procedures of periodical assessments of degrees of confidentiality for classified data. Lead institutions: Ministry of Internal Affairs Supporting institutions: Ministry of Justice, Office of the National Security Council Start date: Not specified, End date: December 2015. Drafting the analysis of the legislative framework in the area of protecting whistleblowers Implementation indicators: Drafted analysis of the legislative framework for the protection of whistleblowers and pursuant to this, procedures initiated to amend existing acts or draft new acts. Version for comment: not for citation or publication 22 Lead institutions: Ministry of Justice Supporting institutions: Ministry of Labour and the Pension System Start date: Not specified, End date: 31 December 2014

1. Right to Access Information Legislative Framework

Commitment Text:

1.1. Amendments to the Act on the Right of Access to Information  

Implementation indicators: Adoption at the Government session of the Proposal of the Act on Amendments to the Act on the Right of Access to Information, in line with Directive 2013/37/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 amending Directive 2003/98/EC on the re-use of public sector information.

Lead institutions: Ministry of Administration

Supporting institutions: Information Commissioner

Start date: Not specified...........    End date: July 2015

1.2. Legal regulation of records of exclusive rights to reuse  

Implementation indicators:

•  adoption of implementing regulations (Ministry of Administration)

•  drafted and publically available records of exclusive rights for re-use (Information Commissioner)

Lead institutions: Ministry of Administration, Information Commissioner

Supporting institutions: None specified

Start date: Not specified...........    End date: December 2015

1.3. Amendments to the Act on Data Confidentiality  

Implementation indicators: Adoption at the Government session of the Proposal of Amendments of the Act on Data Confidentiality which:

• outlines in detail the persons subject to application of the Act;
• further emphasises the importance of differentiating classified data from other types of confidentiality (business secrets, professional secrets, etc.);
• introduces centralised access to the manner of determining the criteria for data classification;
• clearly defines the definitions from this area, particularly in relation to unclassified data and declassification procedures;
• clearly defines cases in which the test of proportionality and public interest are carried out;
• introduction of revised rules for procedures of periodical assessments of degrees of confidentiality for classified data.

Lead institutions: Ministry of Internal Affairs

Supporting institutions: Ministry of Justice, Office of the National Security Council

Start date: Not specified...........    End date: December 2015

1.4. Drafting the analysis of the legislative framework in the area of protecting whistleblowers

Implementation indicators: Drafted analysis of the legislative framework for the protection of whistleblowers and pursuant to this, procedures initiated to amend existing acts or draft new acts.

Lead institutions: Ministry of Justice

Supporting institutions: Ministry of Labour and the Pension System

Start date: Not specified...........    End date: December 2014

Commitment Aim:

This commitment sought to strengthen access to information rights by amending existing legislation on access to information (milestone 1.1) and data confidentiality (milestone 1.3) and clarify regulations on rights to reuse data (milestone 1.2) and whistleblower protection (milestone 1.4).

Status

Midterm: Limited

1.1.  Amendments to the Act on the Right of Access to Information (complete)

1.2. Legal regulation of records of exclusive rights to reuse (limited)

The Ordnance on the Content and Manner of Keeping Records of Exclusive Rights to Reuse Information^{[Note 1: See more at http://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2016_03_20_582.html.]} was adopted in March 2015. However, records on exclusive rights to reuse data were not issued and publically available in the foreseen period, since the identification of current contracts on exclusive rights is a long-term process that needs to be undertaken parallel with education on the right to information use and reuse by state bodies. For more information, please see the 2014–2015 midterm IRM report.

1.3. Amendments to the Act on Data Confidentiality (limited)

Since it is necessary to amend a number of other regulations (i.e., the content of the act must align with two related acts, the Information Security Act and the Safety Inspection Act) before full implementation can start, the IRM researcher found completion for this milestone to be limited. For more information, please see the 2014–2015 midterm IRM report.

1.4. Drafting the analysis of the legislative framework in the area of protecting whistleblowers (limited)

The Ministry of Justice has collected data about whistleblower cases in Croatia and opinions on their quality from the appropriate authorities and civil society organisations. However, the draft self-assessment^{[Note 2: The government draft self-assessment report was available for public consultations from 14 September 2016, at https://esavjetovanja.gov.hr/ECon/MainScreen?entityId=4011.]}reports that the input from public authorities and CSOs was not substantial enough for the Ministry of Justice to analyse. For more information, please see the 2014–2015 midterm IRM report.

End of term: Substantial

The implementation of milestone 1.2 is substantially completed. According to the draft self-assessment report, the adopted ordinance stipulates that all data on approval and verification of contracts granting the exclusive right to reuse are to be submitted to the information commissioner within 15 days of signing the contract. During the second year of implementation, the Commissioner’s Office has created a publicly available registry of all approved exclusive rights which will be available as a separate subpage on its website. In an interview with the IRM researcher, the information commissioner^{[Note 3: Interview conducted on 6 September 2016.]} stated, however, that public authorities have not started submitting contracts on exclusive rights. While the effective legal provisions and Ordinance for exclusive rights to re-use were put in to place, collection of records of approved exclusive rights remained incomplete at end of the implementation period, due to the fact that the prerequisites for this are an analytical overview and an educational cycle, implemented by the State Public Administration School. The commissioner is planning to draft an analysis of the legal framework and implementation of open data during the fall in 2016 and will provide a guideline for state bodies for opening data and submitting contracts on exclusive rights. The same will be done for counties and larger cities in 2017. This is due to the fact that institutions can only fulfil their obligation by first identifying the databases and registers that could potentially have contracts on exclusive rights.

Based on government sources and media monitoring conducted by the IRM researcher, there was no further progress on the implementation of milestone 1.3. According to the Ministry of Judiciary, milestone 1.4 had limited completion in the second year of action plan implementation. However, the ministry prepared a draft version of the analysis and is awaiting consultations with state bodies and CSOs. The IRM researcher concurs with this assessment for the milestone.

Did it open government?

Access to information: Major

The protection of the right to access information is still a fairly new development in Croatia, the Law on Access to Information having been adopted in 2003, and it has undergone a significant strengthening before and during the implementation of the previous action plan. This commitment was moderately ambitious in comparison, intending to strengthen access to information rights by amending and clarifying the existing legislative framework. According to CSO representatives,^{[Note 4: Statements gathered at an event organised by the information commissioner on 28 September 2016. For more information, see the Methodological Note section and http://www.pristupinfo.hr/en/povjerenik-za-etiku/.]} Croatia is now among the first five countries in the world when it comes to the quality of the legal framework regulating the right to access information. While doubts about the existence of political will—of past, current, and future governments—for implementation of that legal framework were raised, a representative from one of the leading CSOs, GONG^{[Note 5: The name originates as an acronym for „Građani organizirano nadgledaju glasanje“ (Citizens Organize to Supervise Elections).]}, called it “an opportunity for a breakthrough.” Also, the 2015 Annual Report on the Implementation of the Act on the Right of Access to Information shows an increased level of realisation of the legal provisions when compared to previous years.^{[Note 6: See the Croatian language version of the Annual Report on the Implementation of the Act on the Right of Access to Information at http://www.pristupinfo.hr/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/1-Izvje%C5%A1%C4%87e-o-provedbi-Zakona-o-pravu-na-pristup-informacijama-za-2015-finalno1.pdf.]} For example, the 2015 annual report cites a slight increase in the percentage of freedom of information and reuse requests resolved in a timely manner (93.55% in 2015 compared to 92.8% in 2014) and a reduction in the overall number of pending requests (209 in 2015 versus 221 in 2014), despite a large backlog carried over from previous years.^{[Note 7: Ibid., p. 9–11.]} However, the report identifies a dearth of qualified staff to handle requests as a continued obstacle to the full implementation of the law.^{[Note 8: Ibid., p. 9.]} Since the first two milestones were the most ambitious, with 1.1 fully and 1.2 substantially implemented, their impact on government practice was major and marginal, respectively. This resulted in the government now being obliged to disclose more information, and in an improved manner. Yet, more work is required to ensure that records of exlusive rights are collected and displayed on the public registry. Overall, however, given that this commitment addresses a key aspect to ensuring access to information—the proper formulation of legislative guidelines—this commitment has had a major impact on opening government.

Carried forward?

The next action has not been drafted or released by the government in accordance with the OGP schedule. The IRM researcher suggests the following steps to reach a full completion of the unfinished milestones:

• Amend the Data Confidentiality Act by including a commitment to amend all three relevant legislative acts in the next action plan as a single package, making sure that the the Interdepartmental Working Group, which is responsible for drafting the commitment, is open to participation from interested civil society organisations.
• Complete the analysis of the legal framework for whistleblower protection as a prerequisite to either amending the existing legislation in order to improve the protection of whistleblowers or introducing a specific law for their protection. Also, create and disseminate a guide for citizens based on the completed analysis of existing legal provisions in order to provide structured and easily accessible information on the issue.