Dies ist eine HTML Version eines Anhanges der Informationsfreiheitsanfrage 'List of requests unanswered due to lack of postal address'.


From: 
 
Sent: 
22 April 2014 17:14 
To: 
 
Cc: 
SG ACCES DOCUMENTS 
Subject: 
RE: FW: Access to Documents request 
 
 
Dear 

 
As I tried to explain to you this is not a matter of data protection but a matter of proper notification of 
the access-to-document decision by the Commission. 
It goes without saying that you data will be handled in line with the applicable rules on data protection. 
 
In the absence of an operational system of electronic notification the European Commission has decided 
to notify decisions on access-to-documents by registered mail.  
 
Yours sincerely, 
 
 
 
 
 
European Commission 

Secretariat-General  
Unit B4: Transparency 
 

 
 
B-1049 Brussels 
  
 
 
 
From: 
  
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 5:07 PM 
To: 
 (SG) 
Subject: Re: FW: Access to Documents request 
 
Dear 
 
 
I have explained the DP situation as clearly as I can. Before I refer this to the 
Ombudsman, would you like to consult your Data Protection Officer? 
 
You have not demonstrated at all why you "need" to send a registered postal mail  
 
kind regards 
 


 
 
On 22/04/14 16:54, 
 wrote: 
Dear 

  
Unfortunately the European Commission does not operate a system of 
electronic notification or signature. 
There is therefore clearly the functional need to notify by registered (ordinary) 
mail. 
  
Yours sincerely, 
  
 
 
 
  
European Commission 
Secretariat-General  
Unit B4: Transparency 
 

 
 
B-1049 Brussels 
  
  
  
  
From: 
  
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 4:10 PM 
To: 
 (SG) 
Subject: Re: FW: Access to Documents request 
  
Dear 
 
 
thank you for your reply 
 
As you may be aware, I am an expert in information policy, and the 
questions I ask raise important points of law and policy w.r.t to 
Access to Documents (and possibly 45/2001), therefore I would be 
grateful for a full and official response. My questions were posed 
with care, and I do not think my points have been answered 
 
In particular, an email reply and acknowledgement of receipt by the 
applicant would have no less legal validity in a Court of law than a 
hand-written signature in all but extremely unlikely circumstances 
(and perhaps you could give an example). Under the EU Electronic 
Signature Directive, affixing my name in the signature line of an 

ordinary email is a form of electronic signature (albeit neither 
Qualified nor Advanced), and cannot be denied legal validity 
purely because it is electronic (although the weight accorded in 
case of dispute will depend on the circumstances and such technical 
considerations) 
 
The Commission's policy of sending decisions via registered mail 
in not necessary for the purpose of fulfilment of the access requests 
electronically. Disclosing a private address to a central office of the 
Commission engages significant privacy interests, risks of mistakes 
and unauthorised disclosure, and uncertainties about the finality of 
purpose of the data. The Commission would have to demonstrate 
that such a blanket policy was effective and proportionate to 
eligible liabilities and risks occurring in cases where there is no 
functional need for the postal address. This seems unlikely. 
 
kind regards 
 
 
 
P.S. it might be useful to pass on that there appears to be a 
compatibility bug in Commission email systems interoperability 
with Thunderbird|Liunux (a very common FOSS client), so that 
just by hitting reply, the program believes (some malformed 
HTMLL metadata?) is an attachment, and never returns from a loop 
trying to find the attachment. When I truncate the orginal text 
appeded in the reply (as just here) it sends normally. I will also 
report this bug to the relevant DG.