Recurrent: Particular
Resolution appealed: R CTBG 0382/2026
In exercise of the right of access to public information, the NATIONAL SECURITIES MARKET COMMISSION (CNMV) was requested to access the full and certified copy of the complete administrative file relating to Beka Values Agencia de Valor S.A., from its initial authorization until the revocation of December 2022, including the periodic supervision reports, minutes, internal notes, internal communications and resolutions adopted.
The requested entity issued a decision in which it agreed to deny access under the provisions of Article 233 LMVSI, alleging that this is confidential and secret information, as well as because the status of interested party has not been proven in the applicant’s file. In this regard , it points out that, unlike the previous regulation, the current article 233 of the LMV extends the scope of confidentiality and establishes in a restrictive way the prohibition of granting access to or disclosing any information or document held by the CNMV as a result of the exercise of its functions, unless one of the exceptions set forth in paragraph 2 thereof concurs, being a special rule prevailing with respect to that contained in the LTAIBG, and without the various exceptions to the reserved nature of the information set forth in article 233.2 of the LMV contemplating requests for information made under the LTAIBG.
The Council considers the complaint, recognising that the provision of the aforementioned Article 233 LMVSI establishes a specific legal regime of a partial nature, but emphasising the nature of the right of access to information, to conclude that an interpretation of the first, second paragraph, additional provision of the LTAIBG that allows, in general, the exclusion of entire spheres of action of public authorities from the possibility of exercising the right of access to public information simply by including a confidentiality reservation in a sectoral law such as the LMVSI can hardly be found to fit into our constitutional system. In this regard, it concludes that the supplementary application of the LTAIBG requires the restrictive interpretation of the confidentiality reservation and any limits that may arise, the weighting of the various rights present, the making of a proportionality judgment and the partial granting of that part of the information that is not affected by the limit as provided for in Articles 14.2 and 16 of the LTAIBG. On the other hand, it points out that the reference to the claimant not having the status of interested party is also not relevant from the perspective of the exercise of the right of access.
Finally, it indicates that the estimate does not necessarily lead to the recognition of full and unrestricted access to all the information requested, since the projection of a confidentiality clause on the matter by decision of the sectoral legislator, allows to presume the existence of a material field of information that must in fact be removed from public knowledge and therefore from the right of access, in view of the concurrence of other legal assets worthy of protection, so that, in the interests of greater legal certainty and in accordance with a principle of prudence, the harmonious protection of both legal interests at stake the estimate is limited to information that does not have a confidential nature, taking into account that the confidentiality of the rest of the agreement must be justified.