On 28 September 2011, the European Ombudsman organised a seminar in the European Parliament in Brussels entitled "International Right to Know Day – What the EU can learn from others". It was the Ombudsman's second event on the occasion of the "International Right to Know Day", which was established in 2003 by access to information advocates from around the world. Its aim is to raise awareness of every individual's right of access to information.

Over 100 representatives of associations, NGOs, companies, civil society organisations, journalists, regional and national representations, and representatives of other EU institutions attended the event to discuss "best practices" in the field of transparency and access to documents. The dialogue with stakeholders is an important priority in the strategy for the Ombudsman's mandate 2009-2014.

The discussion panel included the European Ombudsman, Mr P. Nikiforos Diamandouros, the Finnish Minister for International Development and former MEP, Ms Heidi Hautala, the Chargé d'Affaires of the United States Mission to the EU, Mr Thomas J. White, and the Director of Access Info Europe, Ms Helen Darbishire. Mr Geoff Meade, Europe Editor of the Press Association, chaired the event.

Mr Diamandouros stated that, while much progress in the area of transparency has been made in the EU administration over the past decade, the fact remains that one third of the inquiries carried out by the European Ombudsman each year concern lack of transparency. He stressed the improvements brought about by the Lisbon Treaty concerning the European citizens' "right to know", as well as the need to identify "best practices".

He called on the EU administration to be more pro-active as regards access to documents and information. According to the Ombudsman, many EU institutions are still too reactive in their approach to public access and some even seem to be defensive in their thinking. Mr Diamandouros proposed the appointment of information officers and the creation of citizen-friendly online registers of documents in all EU institutions.

Ms Hautala explained how the pro-active approach of the Nordic countries to transparency could serve as a role model for the EU. According to her, it is vital that citizens have access to documents and information before decisions are taken, and not only afterwards.

She underlined, however, that even in Finland many citizens are not informed about their "right to know". Ms Hautala also expressed her concerns about the protracted nature of the ongoing reform of Regulation 1049/2001 and about recent court rulings in the field of access to documents. She warned of a risk that the principle of openness might be reversed. She welcomed the recent report by MEP Michael Cashman and urged the European Parliament to act on it.

Mr White presented the United States Freedom of Information Act, which gives anyone the right to request US government information. He stated that the federal register of the US government is one of the biggest in the world and that transparency is one of the priorities of President Obama, both domestically and in the framework of the international "open government partnership".

Mr White explained that a lot of the information disclosed by Wikileaks could have easily been accessed through the Freedom of Information Act. He also clarified the reasons for refusing access to documents, such as national security concerns, business secrets, and privacy protection. In the United States, the first administrative appeal against the refusal of documents is free of charge, following which the applicant has to seek judicial redress.

Ms Darbishire stressed that the "right to know" is a fundamental human right and that the EU is no longer a diplomatic club where decisions can be made in secret. She supported the Ombudsman's view that the EU administration should become more pro-active and that, when drafting documents, officials should already have in mind that they may well be disclosed in the future.

Ms Darbishire stated that too few citizens use their right to access EU documents. She presented the new website www.asktheeu.org which is aimed at facilitating citizens' access to document requests. Through the website, it is possible for everybody to follow the progress of a request and to get access to other applicants' requests.

During the discussion that followed, a representative from Greenpeace pointed out that areas covered by the Euratom Treaty, such as nuclear issues, are still a "dark corner" in the EU. He asked the Ombudsman whether his mandate could not be extended to include this Treaty. Mr Diamandouros welcomed the suggestion.

A Commission Head of Unit dealing with access to documents requests complained about too many "fishing requests", namely, requests for huge numbers of documents which take a lot of time to process. Mr White explained that the United States deals with this problem by making access to documents procedures which are in the public interest free of charge for the applicant. If there is no public interest involved, applicants have to pay a fee.

Ms Darbishire responded that the easiest way to avoid "fishing requests" is to make documents public in the first place. A representative of ALTER EU said that the Commission has to blame itself for "fishing requests", which he called "legitimate requests". He quoted the poor functioning of the EU register of lobbyists as an example of the Commission's failure to put information out in the open.

A representative of the association of national civil society organisations raised the issue of lack of transparency in the Council. Ms Hautala stressed that the EP has recently adopted her report on greater transparency concerning Council documents, including the publication of agendas and protocols. Ms Darbishire criticised the Council as one of the least transparent EU institutions. As an example, she quoted a recent court case, lodged by Access Info Europe, in which the court overturned the Council's refusal to disclose documents related to the Council working group on transparency.

The Ombudsman concluded the debate by stressing the need for each EU institution to think of citizens' rights as part of their core business. He stated that there is a cultural change taking place as regards more openness in the EU institutions, especially in the Commission. However, very often, this is taking place at the top level of the administration and has not reached the lower levels yet. He called for better training opportunities for EU civil servants in this field. Furthermore, he underlined the important role that NGOs and other stakeholders have to play in strengthening the unfolding dynamic of this cultural change towards more pro-active transparency.

17 November 2011