Opinion on Israeli army demolitions in West Bank
Alexander Fanta made this Informationsfreiheit request to Juristischer Dienst
Dear Legal Service,
Under the right of access to documents in the EU treaties, as developed in Regulation 1049/2001, I am requesting documents which contain the following information:
- The opinion by the Legal Service which deals with Israeli army actions in the West Bank dating to March 18, 2017, as mentioned in this news report: https://orientxxi.info/magazine/enquete-...
Yours faithfully,
Alexander Fanta
Follow the Money
Rue Auguste Orts 2
1000 Bruxelles
Dear Sir or Madam,
We hereby acknowledge the receipt of your request for access to documents
sent on 10/10/2023 and registered on 10/10/2023 under the case number
2023/5937.
We will handle your request within 15 working days as of the date of
registration. The time-limit expires on 31/10/2023. We will let you know
if we need to extend this time limit for additional 15 working days.
To find more information on how we process your personal data, please see
[1]the privacy statement.
Yours faithfully,
Legal service - Access to Documents
European Commission
References
Visible links
1. https://ec.europa.eu/info/principles-and...
Dear Mr Fanta,
We refer to your request for access to documents under Regulation (EC) No
1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and
Commission documents (OJ L 145, 31.05.2001, page 43), registered under the
reference 2023/5937.
Your request is currently being handled. However, in view of the number
and nature of the requests for access to documents the Legal Service is
dealing with, we will not be in a position to complete the processing of
your request within the time limit of 15 working days, which expires
tomorrow Tuesday, 31October 2023.
For this reason, we will need to extend the deadline by 15 working days,
in accordance with Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001. The new
time-limit expires on 23 November 2023.
We apologise for this delay and for any inconvenience this may cause.
Yours sincerely,
Access to Documents team
European Commission
Legal Service
Berlaymont
B-1049 Brussels/Belgium
[1][email address]
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
Link: [1]File-List
Link: [2]Edit-Time-Data
Link: [3]themeData
Link: [4]colorSchemeMapping
[5]Your request for Access to Documents EASE 2023/5937 -
Ares(2023)7812864 (Please use this link only if you are an Ares user –
Svp, utilisez ce lien exclusivement si vous êtes un(e) utilisateur d’Ares)
Dear Mr Fanta,
Attached, please find the Legal Service’s reply to your above-mentioned
request for access to documents.
We kindly ask you to confirm and acknowledge, by return e-mail, receipt of
the Commission Legal Service’s reply.
Yours sincerely,
Access to Documents team
European Commission
Legal Service
Berlaymont
B-1049 Brussels/Belgium
[6][email address]
References
Visible links
1. file:///tmp/cid:filelist.xml@01DA18A9.990F3020
2. file:///tmp/cid:editdata.mso
3. file:///tmp/~~themedata~~
4. file:///tmp/~~colorschememapping~~
5. https://webgate.ec.testa.eu/Ares/documen...
6. mailto:[email address]
Dear Legal Service,
Please pass this on to the person who reviews confirmatory applications.
I am filing the following confirmatory application with regards to my access to documents request 'Opinion on Israeli army demolitions in West Bank'.
The reply I received alludes to "extremely tense situation in the Middle East" and the "highly sensitive legal issues" dealt with in the analysis. That the General Court said in the case Pech v Council, "it should be noted that allegedly sensitive subject matter cannot be confused with a sensitive document" (para 57). Rather, the court noted that to validate the claim of special sensitivity in grounding non-disclosure, "it is the content of the opinion itself which must be particularly sensitive" (para 93).
As for the claim that disclosure would make "public preliminary views on possible course of action", in the Pech case the Court found that "it should be noted that disagreement between the Council’s members is more the rule than the exception and does not per se justify application of the exception" (para 56).
I further would like to point out the finding of the court in Pech in regard to Article 4(2), second indent, which is invoked in the reply. "In that regard, as the Court of Justice has observed, it is precisely transparency concerning legal advice that contributes to conferring greater legitimacy on the institutions in the eyes of European citizens and increasing their confidence in them by allowing divergences between various points of view to be openly debated" (para 55).
Further, I note that in In ‘t Veld v Council, the ECJ agreed with the General Court that not all internal debates could reveal strategic objectives or be exploited by negotiating partners, and in Besselink v Council, the General Court found that disclosing positions already known by negotiating partners, drafted before any actual negotiation took place, can also not reasonably be said to undermine the EU’s international relations.
Apart from these points, I feel that the Commission has made some arguments of a very general nature against disclosure, while in my view it has not properly considered different angles which could allow disclosure. I note that the general content of the opinion is already in the public domain through the news article linked in my initial application, so the argument can't be the fear of disclosing a position to negotiating partners. Rather, a full disclosure would allow the European public to properly consider the analysis, and therefore make a more grounded judgement on the matters at hand.
Pertaining to the argument that the sensitivity of the matter, the outbreak of war in the Middle East, should serve as grounds against disclosure, I would like to contend exactly the opposite. European policy-making on the Middle East is at a crossroads. This is precisely the time for public scrutiny for previous decision-making (and the legal opinions that guided it), so as not to repeat the same mistakes the next time round.
Yours faithfully,
Alexander Fanta
Follow the Money
Rue Auguste Orts 2
1000 Bruxelles
Dear Sir or Madam,
We hereby acknowledge the receipt of your confirmatory request for case
2023/5937, sent on 17/11/2023 and registered on 20/11/2023.
We will handle your confirmatory request within 15 working days as of the
date of registration. The time-limit expires on 11/12/2023. We will let
you know if we need to extend this time limit for additional 15 working
days.
Yours faithfully,
Secretariat-General - Access to Documents
European Commission
Dear Mr. Fanta,
We are writing concerning your confirmatory request for access to
Commission documents for case 2023/5937 registered on 20/11/2023.
We are currently working on your confirmatory request. However, we have
not yet been able to gather all the elements necessary to carry out a full
analysis of your request. Due to the need to conduct internal
consultations we will not be able to send you the reply within the
prescribed time limit expiring on 11/12/2023.
Therefore, in line with Article 8(2) of [1]Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 we
need to extend this time limit by 15 additional working days. The new time
limit expires on 10/01/2024.
We apologise for any inconvenience this may cause.
Kind regards,
SG.C1 - Transparency, Document Management and Access to Documents
References
Visible links
1. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/...
Dear Mr. Fanta,
We refer to your confirmatory application for access to Commission
documents, registered on 20/11/2023, under reference 2023/5937.
On 11/12/2023, we extended the time limit for processing your confirmatory
application to 10/01/2024.
Unfortunately, we have not yet been able to gather all the elements we
need for a full examination of your application which requires a continued
consultation between several Commission services.
Please be assured that the examination of your request is ongoing and that
you will receive a reply from the Commission as soon as possible.
Finally, we would like to apologise again for the delay in providing you
the final reply to your confirmatory application and for any inconvenience
caused by this delay.
Yours sincerely,
SG.C1 – Transparency, document management and access to documents
Dear FANTA, Alexander,
Please find attached the electronic version of European Commission
Decision C(2024)5490 as adopted by the European Commission on 24/07/2024
concerning the request 2023/5937.
In accordance with the Terms and Conditions of this portal, please note
that this decision is being formally notified pursuant to article 297 TFEU
through this electronic platform only.
Yours sincerely,
Access to documents team - SG.C.1