Dear Information Society and Media (INFSO),

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 first draft and the most recent draft of the report from Helios produced under the following Commission study:

"Support for the preparation of an Impact Assessment to accompany and analyse the impact of Commission's Decision on the 2 GHz band."

This is being managed in the team under Pearse O'Donoohue.

Yours faithfully,

Alan Smithson

Dear Information Society and Media (INFSO),

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Information Society and Media (INFSO)'s handling of my FOI request 'Commission study on the 2GHz band'.

The request was refused on the basis that "Drafts of the report are internal documents that are not accessible to the public." However, the purpose of requesting documents is that they are internal; once they have been published, there is no need to request them.

This document does not relate to policy development. Therefore please describe the specific legal basis on which this request has been refused - in other words, what is it about this particular document that prevents the draft versions from being released. Alternatively, please supply the documents.

Please also note that I still wish to receive the first draft of the report, if this request is dragged out until the final version of the report is published.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.asktheeu.org/request/commissi...

Yours faithfully,

Alan Smithson

Dear Information Society and Media (INFSO),

Further to my request for an internal review of my request "Access to information request - Commission study on the 2GHz band", I have examined Regulation 1049/2001, and it appears to me that none of the exemptions defined in Article 4 of this Regulation apply to this request:

1) The report was commissioned with a view to eventual publication, so none of the content can be prejudicial to the interests of Helios or any third party. Indeed, if the Commission had so decided, the first draft could already have been published, and Helios would have supplied it with this possibility in mind.

2) Therefore subsections 1), 2) and 4) of Article 4 clearly do not apply in this case.

3) Subsection 3) clearly does not give any general exemption of disclosure of drafts of documents that are intended for eventual publication unless this would "seriously undermine the institution's decision making process". Therefore, if you are relying on this exemption, please describe the manner in which you believe that this decision making process would be undermined in this particular case, and the assessment of the extent of this as being at least "serious".

4) If you are relying on subsection 6), I request a redacted version of the document containing the parts of the first draft to which this subsection does not apply.

I would also draw your attention inter alia to cases 488/2007/PB and 0070/2008/TS of the European Ombudsman, which give conclusions relating to the disclosure of documents by European institutions that have some bearing on this request.

Yours faithfully,

Alan Smithson