Recurrent: Ministry of the Interior

Recurred resolution: R/0100/2024

The representative of the Independent Trade Union and Civil Servants Central (CSIF) asked the Ministry of the Interior for a copy of the inspection report that led to the archiving of the inspection proceedings initiated following a complaint lodged by the access to the computer (and consultation of payroll data) of a staff member of the Pamplona Penitentiary Centre, by another staff member of the same centre.

The Ministry of the Interior denied the requested access in response to the opposition expressed in the hearing conducted under article 19.3 LTAIBG by the complainant, concluding that the conflict observed is due to personal disagreements between two female civil servants and is not in the public interest. Later, at the allegation stage, it invokes the concurrence of the limit provided for in article 14.1.g) LTAIBG.

The Council considers the claim by acknowledging access to the content of the report that leads to the archiving of the indicated file, after dissociation of the personal data included, in accordance with the provisions of Article 15.4 LTAIBG.

The conclusion is based on the doctrine established in Resolution 78/2021, of July 26 [confirmed in its entirety by Judgment 107/2022 of the Central Court of Administrative Litigation No. 10, of June 14 (p.o. 41/2021)], in a substantially identical case, in which it is stressed that the public interest in access “is marked by its usefulness to know how decisions regarding the exercise of a regulated power such as disciplinary are taken by the corresponding administrative bodies, and, more specifically, how the decision is taken to file a complaint or initiate a sanctioning procedure, there being a special public interest in supervising those decisions that lead to the archive since, in the absence of any instrument of control or accountability, a power that is not may end up acquiring a discretionary character”.

It is added that, taking into account the personal data that may appear in the reports generated in the framework of previous actions, the rules contained in Article 15 LTAIBG must be applied, for their protection; in particular, to facilitate the prior access dissociation of the personal data so as to prevent the identification of the persons affected.

With regard to the late invocation of the limit on access provided for in article 14.1.g) LTAIBG, it is pointed out that its concurrence has not been justified, since neither the mere reference to which the exercise of the inspection function may be impaired is sufficient; nor has it been taken into account that in this case the procedure has already been completed by means of an archival resolution, so that access to the report supporting such a decision can hardly be considered as an obstacle to the exercise of the monitoring, inspection and control functions.