• Fecha: 29 Jul 2011

• Ver archivos adjuntos

The foundation made requests for information from six public institutions that refused to comply, citing personal data reserves, among other aspects, as reasons for not delivering. However, after the claims of Pro Acceso, the Transparency Council rejected the agencies’ arguments, stating that although these may be private records, the required information can be delivered "by striking" such private content. These verdicts set precedent for the process of data dissociation.

Pro Acceso achieved an important advance in access to information during this first half of the year. The advance is due to verdicts decided by the Council for Transparency (CPT) for the delivery of information that the foundation required from six public institutions that refused to give access to the material citing the backup of personal data, among others aspects as reasons.

CPT's decision sets a precedent because it sets the criteria for the practice of the dissociation of data; both personal and third party content considered "reserved," by using a method of  "striking through” confidential data. This allows institutions and authorities to maintain the pool of confidential data without impeding access to required information.

These verdicts came after Pro Acceso conducted a series of requests for information to the Investigative judicial Police, Police of Chile, National Service of Geology and Mining (SERNAGEOMIN), the Iquique SEREMI of Health, the Ministry of Education, and the Ministry of Health, as part of the investigation that led to the study "Access to Information and Transparency Concerning the Citizens’ Demand for Public Information in Chile 2010," published in January of this year.
 
Precisely in the recommendations of the study, Pro Acceso asked the Council for Transparency to generate "general instructions to all public institutions regarding the appropriate way to make this information publicly available, and the correct way to apply personal data backup and creation of public versions."

Check the rulings from the CPT: