[ad_1]
The three-judge panel decided to reopen the proceedings on the merits of the appeal and to postpone the proceedings.
The court found that journalists so far “have not provided any evidence that there is a real possibility of reproducing the sound recording” they seek from the government.
“There is a factual and legal basis for inviting the applicants, the defendant and the third party in question to provide additional evidence on the defendant’s actual ability to reproduce the audio of the hearing and provide the applicants,” the court ruled.
According to the court, although the Government Registry stated that the recording could not be reproduced, “it did not specify precisely and clearly whether there was a real possibility of reproducing the audio recording of the meeting and, if so, the work and time required to do it”.
Journalists went to court when the government refused to provide an audio recording of a meeting in October 2018 that discussed the issue of access to registration data for journalists for free.
The Court of First Instance dismissed the journalists’ complaint, which they appealed.
Journalists who have appealed against the decision take the position that the provision of information may be restricted only for specific reasons provided by law, i. and. in the case of state security, private personal data problems. These issues were not present at the Government meeting.
In response to the journalists’ complaint, the Government explained that it had no legal basis for making, storing, or providing audio recordings of the deliberations to others, and emphasized that the law at that time only required the recording of Government meetings.
According to her, the minutes of the government meeting provided to the journalists ensured the right to know and collect information.
According to the Government, it is clear that before the amendments to the law, which established that the meetings of the Cabinet of Ministers were public, the topics discussed were not considered for public dissemination, since they did not enact legislation or other decisions. .
Additional evidence is requested from the parties before July 8.
Reproduction of information from the BNS news agency in the media and on websites without the written consent of UAB “BNS” is prohibited.
[ad_2]
