Recurrent: National Securities Market Commission
Resolution appealed: R CTBG 0382/2026
In exercise of the right of access to public information, the CNMV was requested to access the complete administrative file relating to Beka Values Agencia de Valores S.A., from its initial authorization until the revocation in December 2022.
The requested Authority refused access on the grounds that the applicable law establishes a duty of secrecy and that the applicant has not established the status of interested party in the file. It is argued that Article 233 of Law 6/2023, of March 17, on Securities Markets and Investment Services (hereinafter, the LMVSI) prohibits the disclosure of any information held by the CNMV as a result of the exercise of its functions, unless one of the exceptions set forth in this precept concurs, and it is therefore not necessary to carry out any prior weighting or valuation. And he adds that this article is configured as a special rule to be applied with a prevailing character with respect to that contained in the LTAIBG, without the exceptions to this prohibition being applicable in the present case.
The Council considered the complaint on the grounds that the refusal was based on the automatic application of Article 233 LMVSI without taking into account the provisions of the LTAIBG, which requires the restrictive interpretation of the confidentiality reservation and any limits that may exist. In this regard, it is stated that the inclusion of confidentiality clauses in sectoral laws does not make it possible to interpret the First, Second, Additional Provision of the LTAIBG to the effect that the LTAIBG generally allows for the exclusion of entire areas of activity of public authorities from the possibility of exercising the right of access to public information.
On the other hand, it is emphasized that the absence of the status of interested party by the claimant is not relevant from the perspective of the exercise of the right of access, since the request is not a formal procedure, since the revocation file would have acquired strength both administratively and judicially. It concludes by pointing out that the estimation of the claim does not imply the recognition of full and unrestricted access to all the information claimed, but must be limited to information that is not confidential.