Recurrent: Ministry of the Interior
Resolution appealed: R CTBG 0549/2025
In exercise of the right of access to public information, the MINISTRY OF THE INTERIOR was requested to have access to a copy of a concession file (including the proposal) of the Civil Guard Medal of Merit with a white badge for a person, as well as to the previous proceedings carried out.
The requested ministry issued an express ruling in time denying access to the requested information on the basis of Article 14 LTAIBG, paragraph 1 (d), relating to public security. Dissatisfied with the adopted resolution, the interested party filed a complaint with the Council, invoking in its favor the STS of October 16, 2017 (ECLI: ES:TS:2017:3530), and claiming that what was requested was the copy of an administrative file under which honorary recognition was granted, so that no harm could be caused to public safety.
The Council considers the claim by pointing out that the Ministry concerned has not provided any justification for the application of the limit of article 14.1.d) LTAIBG, either in the contested decision or in the processing of claims, but has merely invoked it, which is clearly insufficient to justify the refusal of access. In particular, there is a lack of compliance with the mandate of Article 14.1 LTAIBG, which requires a weighting between the possible damage to the protected legal property (damage test) and the public or private interest in access, it being well known to the Ministry that in these cases there is a public interest in knowing the accredited merits for the granting of the award, insofar as this is indispensable to know how the decision has been taken and “to discern whether the Administration has moved within the scope of discretion, which is recognized for these purposes, without incurring arbitrariness”.
However, it is pointed out, given the subject matter of the request, that it cannot be ruled out that the requested file contains some sensitive information, the disclosure of which effectively causes serious harm to public security and, therefore, in respect of it, the application of the limit of Article 14.1.d) LTAIBG would be justified. If this eventuality occurs, it is not appropriate to deny access to the entire file but to grant partial access in accordance with the provisions of Article 16 LTAIBG.