Source: Blic
Comments
Rodoljub Sabic, Trustee for information
It seems that the turmoil initiated by the public criticism directed by the Trustee for information against Article 45 of the Bill on Protection of Public Information and which continued in the Parliament over the amendment submitted by the Ombudsman taking the side of the trustee, will be finalized by a "compromise". It would be indisputably good if it was not of the nature most common among us - that is a rotten compromise. Certainly, it is very good that the Government quitted the solution which gave the repressive bodies free hands to do without any risqué the data processing, and to dispose of any trial of the Trustee to intervene with the mere invention of security reasons, and that for the whole matter at least the opinion of another body is necessary now - the opinion of the President of the Supreme court.
But it is not good that the Government has again seized for the original solution, which is questionable from the point of some basic legal postulates. For example it is based on the body which is not a body, since the president of a court is not a body, as well as on the obligation which is not obligatory, since no opinion in law is obligatory. What is more, the experts in the subject will easily notice that application of the same would more jeopardize than protect the security interests the Government wants to protect. That is why it would certainly be good to replace the compromise solution as soon as possible with a less original one, one that exists at least in some democratic country.
