Metropolitan Court Returns Decision on HCLU vs. National Police Headquarters (ORFK); The HCLU Plans to Appeal

Today, the HCLU has claimed partial victory in the lawsuit against the ORFK. The court has ordered the ORFK to make public such orders and practices which are of public interest. The HCLU will appeal the decision. Read the premise and the verdict!

Premise:
Previously the HCLU, citing public-interest data, requested from the ORFK all written orders and practices in force. The HCLU turned to the ORFK because during the autumn riots the police referred to such orders and practices which justified their professional and lawful conduct, but were not known to anyone outside of the police. Upon the request, in the past few months the police have sent the HCLU almost 200 protocals, but have denied access to a few dozen others, claiming those to be a danger to public safety. This refusal instigated the lawsuit. The ORFK orders and practices are classified as law, but are obligatory for police officers. Our goal is to make public those orders and measures which regulate the work of the police beyond the law.

Verdict:
Today, the HCLU has partially won against the ORFK. The court has ordered the ORFK to make public such orders and practices which are of public-interest. Of the requested data only two were qualified as public-interest: the orders for the district deputy and the rules for entering and exiting police buildings. According to their statement, the court was in a delicate situation, as they had to rule about data which was unknown to them and could not be requested by them either, as it is part of the lawsuit. With it's ruling the court has established precedent, but the question remains: is it possible to decide purely from the titles of the orders and practices, how those regulations affect the public?

After receiving the verdict in writing, the HCLU will appeal the decision. In the HCLU's view, the content of the orders and practices affect all citizens, therefore they are data of public interest.

 

Share

Related articles

HCLU Wins Landmark Freedom of Information Case

The Hungarian Ministry of Development and Economics is ordered to disclose data, which reveal what investments worth 200 billion Hungarian forints – nearly 800 million euros - were carried out by Swedish companies in exchange for the purchase of Gripen fighter-jets by the Hungarian Air Force. The journalist of on-line newspaper, origo.hu – with legal representation provided by the HCLU - has initiated a Freedom of Information lawsuit in December, 2007, because the Ministry has previously rejected to provide information to the journalist’s FOI request. According to the September 8th ruling of the Regional Court of Appeals, the defendant Ministry acted unlawfully.

The Supreme Court has dismissed the HCLU vs. Ministry of Justice and Law Enforcement lawsuit

Today, the Supreme Court reached its verdict in a second instance decision. The decision was to dismiss the lawsuit. You can find the details by clicking on!

Supreme Court Decision – Data on Budapest’s CCTV Is to Be Made Public

The important lesson in this case is that even though hundreds of cameras are monitoring our lives day and night, the police still do not have any evidence backing up the effectiveness of the CCTV in crime prevention. At least the Supreme Court, in it’s decision, has given back a piece of our right to personal privacy by making public when and where CCTVs are watching, thus we will be less at the mercy of those watching us. On the basis of public interest data, it will be easier to judge the price we have to pay for the promise of public safety.