Recherche FR menu Portail client du Groupe BEI
Recherche
Résultats
5 premiers résultats de la recherche Voir tous les résultats Recherche avancée
Recherches les plus fréquentes
Pages les plus visitées
Reference: SG/A/2024/01
Received Date: 29 April 2024
Subject: Global Emerging Markets Risk Database Consortium
Complainant: Individual
Allegations: Full refusal of access to information in contravention of the EIB Group Transparency Policy
Type: A - Access to Information
Monitoring: Yes
Outcome*: Recommendation(s)
Confidentiality: No
Admissibility*
Assessment*
Investigation*
Dispute Resolution*
Consultation*
Closed*
30/04/2024
27/02/2025
2/05/2025
8/05/2025

* Admissibility date reflects the date the case was officially registered. All other dates pertain to the date in which a stage was completed.

Case Description

In April 2024, the EIB-CM received a complaint from an individual operating a blog focussed on access to information at international organisations. The complaint concerns the disclosure of information contained in the GEMs [Global Emerging Markets] Consortium — General Assembly Annual Meeting Executive Summary and Minutes. The Consortium compiles, calculates, maintains and owns rights in and to a database of certain credit risk information.

Having been refused access to the document at issue on the basis of Article 5.7 of the EIB Group Transparency Policy (exception relating to the protection of the decision-making process), the complainant considers that the reasons put forward by the EIB in justifying full refusal of access to the document at issue are erroneous and in contravention of the EIB Group Transparency Policy. More specifically, the complainant submits that the EIB has misapplied two provisions of the EIB Group Transparency Policy: Articles 5.7 and 5.10. The complainant contends that the EIB has made a blanket refusal in handling the complainant’s initial application rather than a concrete, individual assessment of the content of the document at issue.

The EIB-CM concludes that the reasons put forward by the Bank did not justify the full refusal of access to the document at issue based on the decision-making exception, particularly in recognition of the existence of a right to partial access.

The EIB-CM recommends that the EIB re-assess, based on the specific content of the document at issue, the possibility of granting full or partial access to the document at issue. The EIB’s assessment outcome should be shared in correspondence with the complainant and should be adequately justified.