The Cantonal Court in Sarajevo ruled against the Government of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH) for refusing to provide data on the salaries of ministers, their deputies, and advisors to the Centre for Investigative Reporting (CIN) without a clear justification.
In late 2021, CIN journalists requested the exact amounts of salaries and other income, but instead of providing this information, the General Secretariat of the Government only sent the salary bases and coefficients, denying access to the specific figures.
The decision stated that, although it was undisputed that the requested data was public, “providing this information would reveal certain personal details that are exempt from disclosure by law”. Additionally, it was mentioned that granting public access to certain data “cannot be an end in itself”, without further clarification of what this meant.
As a result, the Court found the decision of the General Secretariat of the FBiH Government to be unclear and vague, as CIN was not given a sufficient explanation for the denial of access. The Court concluded that the General Secretariat and the FBiH Government had failed to establish all the necessary facts to make a lawful decision.
For years, the Government of FBiH consistently responded to the same requests from CIN journalists, but in 2021, it changed its practice without providing any justification. As a result, the government will now be required to reconsider the request in line with the Court’s ruling.
Since 2012, with significant support from the Transparency International Centre for Providing Legal Assistance in the Fight Against Corruption (ALAC), CIN has won seventeen court rulings against institutions and agencies that failed to comply with the Freedom of Access to Information Acts. These include the judiciary and institutions like the Federation Government, which unexpectedly decided to restrict access to data that was previously made available to the public.
In these rulings, the courts stress citizens’ right to know which data is held by public institutions. However, many institutions continue to withhold information from the public, and some have yet to change their practices, even after being sued, disregarding the court’s decisions.
