The Court of First Instance annuls a decision by the Council to refuse access to a document in the field of international relations without considering the possibility of disclosing certain passages contained within it
Heidi Hautala, a Member of the European Parliament, asked the Council to send her a report on conventional arms exports. The report was drawn up by a working group within the framework of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), with a view to enhancing the consistent implementation of common criteria for arms exports.
The Council refused Ms Hautala access to the report, on the ground that it contained sensitive information, the disclosure of which would harm the European Union's relations with non-member countries. Under the Community legislation on access to documents, the Council may refuse access to a document in order to protect the public interest in the field of international relations.
Ms Hautala brought an action before the Court of First Instance, seeking the annulment of the Council's decision to refuse to send her the report.
The Court of First Instance finds, at the outset, that the Council gave adequate consideration to the request for access to the report.
In the field of access to documents concerning international relations, the Council enjoys a discretion which it derives from its political responsibilities. In the Court's view, the refusal to communicate the entire report, which was drawn up for internal use and could, according to the Council, contain formulations and expressions which might create tension with certain non-member countries, was justified.
On the other hand, the Court recalls the general principle that the public should have the widest possible access to documents, and that the exceptions to that principle must be interpreted and applied strictly.
Protection of the public interest in the field of international relations could, in the Court's view, be ensured if the Council considered the possibility of removing certain passages of the document which might harm international relations. The Council should therefore have examined whether partial access could be granted to the document in question.
In its examination, the Council must balance the interest in public access to the passages not removed against the interest of good administration, bearing in mind the workload which might follow from granting partial access.
The Court of First Instance therefore concludes that the Council should have considered whether partial access to the information in the report was possible, or whether the report as a whole was covered by the exceptions to the general principle of access to Council documents. In those circumstances, the Court annuls the Council's decision to refuse access to the document.
N.B.: An appeal against this judgment of the Court of First Instance, limited to points of law, may be brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities within two months of notification.
Unofficial document for media use which does not bind the Court of First Instance. Available in English, Finnish, French, German and Swedish.
For the full text of the judgment, consult our Internet page www.curia.eu.int at around 3 pm today.
For further information, contact Fionnuala Connolly, tel. (00 352) 4303 3366, fax (00 352) 4303 2731.