ABSTRACT

A citizen submitted a request for access to information addressed to the public company Ingeniería y Economía del Transporte, S.A. (INECO), attached to the Ministry of Development, aimed at knowing the remuneration received by the members of the management team of the company (identified as such on its own website) during the year 2014. INECO denied the request on the grounds that it was only obliged to provide the remuneration received by its President, in accordance with the provisions of article 8 of the Transparency Act, which provides for the publication of the remuneration of senior officials and senior officials of the entities included in the scope of application of the Act.

Submitted a complaint to the Council for Transparency and Good Governance, the latter understood that the complaint should be considered and, therefore, that the information should be provided. As a basis for its arguments, the CTBG considered that, in accordance with the provisions of the regulation, the obligations of active publicity provided for in it are a minimum of information that the agencies subject to the Law should make public proactively and without the need for an express request. On the other hand, and in exercise of the right of access to information, recognized and regulated in the same rule, it was possible to request other information in the possession of the agency. Access to this information must take into account, in any case, the possible application of the causes of inadmission and the limits to the right of access provided for in the norm.

In this specific case, the CTBG considered that access to the remuneration received by the management team of INECO, fell within the concept of public information provided in the Law, that its knowledge also met the criteria set by this body in interpretative criterion No. 1, approved jointly with the Spanish Data Protection Agency (AEPD) by taking into account the relevant position of the management team within the organization and its role in the decision-making process and that, therefore, no other condition existed - which, on the other hand, had not been alleged - to deny the information.

Not in accordance with the resolution, INECO has filed a contentious-administrative appeal against it.

State: The judgment of the Madrid Administrative Court No. 10 is a firm judgment in favor of providing information.