[ad_1]
What you need to know in 2021, every morning.
Corruption investigation organization K-Monitor wrote on Sunday that the Hungarian Tourism Agency (NGO) refused to reveal to the National Authority for Data Protection and Freedom of Information who are members of the “professional body” that advises the agency when evaluating grants outside of applications. .
In 2019, it turned out that in the first round of grants of the 300 billion Kisfaludy program until 2030, the main NER players received significant grants: in addition to the representatives of Fidesz, István Garancsi, Zsolt Hernádi, the joint venture of Sándor Csányi, Gábor The Széles Mészáros five-star hotel connected to Lőrinc also won a non-refundable grant.
The MTÜ is led by Zoltán Guller, who mentioned Orbán Ráhel among his assistants in 2018, whose acquaintances later held good positions at the MTÜ. Guller last made the news in early February when he said in a video message that Brussels and Budapest would not help either, but that the government was on the side of the tourism sector from the get-go. Since then, this video has disappeared from the Internet.
It was also recently revealed that Bence Laposa, the president of the Balaton Circle, requested and received more than 100 million grants from the Tourism Agency for his own businesses, as well as acting as a consultant to the NGO. Because of this, such a scandal broke out in the Circle that eventually all leadership resigned.
According to a document published on the website of the Data Protection Authority on February 4, a notifier complained to the authority that the NGO had not responded to the content of its data request in March last year. The applicant wondered who the CEO of the NGO was talking about when he mentioned in a March 2020 interview a “professional panel” involved in evaluating grant applications submitted outside of the application system.
As the NGO did not substantially respond to the person who made the public interest request, the authority launched an investigation. According to the NGO, this information is confidential for 10 years, however, according to the agency, the information requested does not serve as a basis for the decision from the beginning, it is irrelevant for the valuation of the grants.
Furthermore, the entire NGO organization is involved in the process of preparing, documenting and evaluating submitted grants outside the application system, and the protection of employees’ personal data is more important than the public interest in knowing the data. personnel of the employees involved. in the processing of grant applications.
However, the authority did not agree with this argument: according to the Information Law, the names, responsibilities, duties and other personal data of the NGO, as a body that exercises public functions, acts in its functions and powers, are also data public in the public interest. Therefore, the names and responsibilities of all employees whose responsibilities include participating in the evaluation of grant applications are public, Attila Péterfalvi wrote in his report.
According to the MTÜ, on the other hand, “the provision of data could make the external contact of the people involved in the decision-making process uncontrollable, which could endanger the legal functioning of the MTÜ or the performance of its functions and powers without unauthorized outside influence ”.
However, the authority did not consider this to be a valid argument: the notification did not ask for the names of the judges for specific grant applications, but only those who, due to their responsibilities, participate in the evaluation of the submitted grant applications. to the NGO outside the application system. The authority also recalls several legal passages that the NGO could not restrict the disclosure of data.
All this, of course, to no avail, since the MTÜ did not disclose the data in repeated requests. By law, the authority has only one tool in this case: publish a report about it:
As Attila Péterfalvi writes at the end of the report:
“In light of the foregoing, the Authority determined that MTÜ had violated the notifying party’s right to access public data and had repeatedly requested that the data request be fulfilled. As the MTÜ did not comply with the provisions of the Authority’s requests, the Authority issued the Infotv. Pursuant to Section 58 (2) (d), the Infotv. In accordance with article 59 (3), it will publish this report on its website ”.
[ad_2]
