7 December 2006
In the wake of an announcement from EBRD that it will review both its disclosure and environmental policies in 2007, the Global Transparency Initiative (GTI) makes comments on information requests and appeals systems of the Public Information Policy.
On December 6, 2006, the Global Transparency Initiative (GTI) submitted comments to the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) regarding their draft Public Information Policy: Implementing Procedural Provisions for Information Requests and Appeals. These comments come in the wake of the EBRD’s November 2006 announcement that it will conduct a full review of its disclosure and environmental policies in 2007, and the November 2006 board approval of the EBRD’s “PIP: Clarification regarding Confidential” Information Policy.
The GTI comments welcome the EBRD's preparation and release of the draft Implementing Procedures. The GTI notes that there were a number of features to be applauded by the document including: EBRD's acceptance of requests and appeals in official, national languages of member countries (stated para. 2/3); the rapid acknowledgement of requests (ibid); and being guided by the presumption of disclosure in assessing appeals, although this assertion is undermined by the need of confidentiality (para. 3).
However, there are also a number of concerns with the draft Implementing Procedures. In their comments to the EBRD, the GTI makes the following recommendations:
- The EBRD should be required to provide assistance to requesters who are having problems formulating their requests.
- Requesters should be able to stipulate the form in which they would like their requests to be satisfied.
- It should be clear that it is up to requesters to choose where to lodge their request and the EBRD should publish a staff directory to facilitate this.
- Non-electronic requests should not be required to be on the form provided by the Bank.
- The EBRD should publish a register of the key documents and records it holds.
- The time limit for responding to requests should be reduced to 15 days, extendable by a maximum of 15 further days.
- Responses to requests should be in the language requested whenever possible and a translation should be provided for public interest requests.
- The Secretary General should be required to consult other parties when considering internal appeals.
- Provision should be made for an independent level of appeal.
- More detail should be provided as to what will be included in the annual reports on handling of requests.
In addition to these recommendations, the GTI provided Comments on Appeals; citing paragraph 3(v) of the draft Implementing Procedures as a point of contention. This paragraph provides that the Secretary General decides upon all appeals, “assisted as necessary by the General Council and Members of the Executive Committee.” The GTI expressed that the Secretary General should not be the only deciding force when dealing with an internal appeal. Rather, it is preferable to remove this ‘as necessary’ provision, and instead allow for the entire committee to decide the fate of an appeal in concert. It is believed that this will give the process more credibility. They cited the Asian Development Bank’s Public Disclosure Advisory Committee, which provides a similar function, as an example of a more democratic and credible body; whose structure should be emulated by the EBRD.
Read the full GTI comments to EBRD:
For More Information see:
Additional Documents:
EBRD Documents:
PIP Draft Implementing Procedural Provisions for Information Requests and Appeals 06 Nov 2006 (pdf, 21 KB)
PIP Clarifications Regarding Confidentiality 21 Nov 2006 (pdf, 17 KB)
Civil Society Documents:
Bankwatch comments on the EBRD disclosure implementation procedures (Bankwatch website)