pl gergana jouleva, access to information programme (bułgaria): czy administracja aktywnie...

Assessment of Online publications of Executive Bodies in Assessment of Online publications of Executive Bodies in Bulgaria Bulgaria

Audit Audit 20120111

Gergana JoulevaGergana Jouleva, , Executive Director of AIPExecutive Director of AIP

ACCESS TO INFORMATION PROGRAMMEwww.aip-bg.org

23- 25 November 2011, Warsaw, Poland

ACCESS TO INFORMATION PROGRAMME ACCESS TO INFORMATION PROGRAMME WWWWWW.AIP-BG.ORG.AIP-BG.ORG

Assessment of Online publications of Executive Assessment of Online publications of Executive Bodies in BulgariaBodies in Bulgaria

Context 2000 – adoption of APIA

Obligations for publicaiton in Art. 15 and Art. 14;

2007 – assigning an APIA official and reaing rooms

2008 – online publication of the information specified by Art. 15a; „Access to Information“ section


Some Facts

Adoption of APIA in 2000

Adoption of DP and PCI legislation (2002) – exemptions/harm test

Substantial amendments 2007 – reading rooms and public servants in charge, re-use of PSI

Substantial amendments – 2008 – overriding public interest, RA obligations, online publication and ATI section in websites

No IC

Annual reports on ATI state in executive bodies



METHODOLOGY OF THE ASSESSMENTTime period: 22.02.2011 – 25.03.2011Scope: 516 administrative structures in the executive

power system – central, regional, all municipalities – total of 495 web sites assessed

Assessment of:Implementation of Art. 15 of the APIA„Access to Information“ sectionObligations for publication under other laws 505 electronic requests filed



METHODOLOGY OF THE ASSESSMENTAssessment of the online publication of: Institutional information – legal basis of the institution,

functions, services provided, data bases and information resources;

Organizational structure and contact information; Operational information – acts, strategies, plans,

activities; Financial and other transparency – budgets and financial

reports, contracts, conflict of interests declarations; Existence and content of the Access to Information

sections



Results Available:

By Type of Indicator and by Institution:

http://www.aip-bg.org/en/surveys/2011/102395/



Comparative Results of Assessments in 2010 and 2011



ResultsInstitutional information

Legal Basis,

Functions,

Services Provided,

Data Basis and Information Resources




Institutional information



Results 2011Institutional information



Results

Organizational structure and contact information

Organizational chartName of the department for contact with citizensAddress of the department for contact with citizensPhone number of the department for contact with citizensWorking Hours of the department for contact with citizens




Organizational structure/chart



Results 2011Contact Information



Results

Operational Information Acts,

Strategies,

Plans,

Activities and reports




Operational Information



Results

Financial and Other Transparency

Contracts

Budgets and financial reports

Conflict of interests declarations




Financial and Other Transparency



Results„Access to Information“ Section

Description of the access to information procedure within the institution/Internal APIA Implementation Rules;Procedure for accessing the public registers maintained;Contact information; Annual APIA implementation reports – number of requests, refusals, grounds for refusals;

The list of the categories subject to official secret

The list of the declassified documents within the respective authority (§ 9 of the PCIA )



Comparative Results of Assessments in 2010 and 2011 „Access to Information“ Section



Results 2011 Filing Electronic Requests – 505

Responded electronically

267

Responded by snail mail

73

Responded by phone

15


Conclusions

Lack of methodology and unification of the institutional web sites structure and content, as well as of the fees;

Lack of an oversight and coordination body; Lack of sanctions for non-compliance of the obligation for

obline publication; The level of financial and operational transparency is very

low; The Access to Information sections do not serve their

purpose – to facilitate and help citizens in their search for information

The update of the information could hardly be evaluated


Thank you!

Gergana Jouleva, Executive Director of AIP

[email protected]

pl gergana jouleva, access to information programme (bułgaria): czy administracja aktywnie...

Technology

assessment assessment

bulgaria methodology

bulgaria results financial

bulgaria results access

information procedure

information programme

bulgaria results available

assessment time period