The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has issued a ruling against Bulgaria, finding that the country violated the European Convention on Human Rights by denying access to an acquittal judgment in a high-profile case. This decision specifically addresses a request made by journalist Galina Mariova Girginova for the acquittal reasons of a former Minister of Internal Affairs, charged with the failure to supervise the misuse of covert surveillance equipment. The denial by Bulgarian authorities was justified on the grounds of national security classification.
The ECHR determined that the refusal constituted a breach of Article 10 of the Convention, which enshrines the right to freedom of expression, including receiving and imparting information. The court underscored the significance of public access to information, particularly involving former high-ranking officials and matters of substantial public interest, such as the misuse of surveillance operations, which remains a persistent public concern in Bulgaria. The court highlighted that withholding the judgment was not justified in a democratic society, and alternative methods for safeguarding sensitive information should have been explored.
Additionally, the Bulgarian domestic legal structure was found deficient under Article 13, which guarantees an effective remedy. Girginova’s attempt to challenge the information restriction through judicial review was unsuccessful, as local judicial bodies ruled that the Access to Public Information Act was not applicable to court judgments. This indicates a lack of adequate legal recourse for challenging access denials, according to the ECHR’s findings.
The ECHR decision emphasizes the crucial role of judicial transparency and the media in ensuring governmental accountability. This verdict coincides with ongoing concerns about press freedom and the transparency of government actions in Bulgaria, especially in relation to access to public information and the controversial use of state surveillance. The Bulgarian government must now address these issues to align with the Convention’s requirements, though it remains to be seen whether it will pursue a review of this ruling or revise its current policies regarding information access.
For further details, the full article is available on JURIST.