Alankomaiden, Suomen ja Ruotsin valtuuskunnat ilmoittivat äänestävänsä vastausehdotusta vastaan. Tässä yhteydessä annettiin seuraavat lausumat:

Transkriptio

1 EUROOPAN UNIONIN NEUVOSTO Bryssel, 26. kesäkuuta 2009 (30.06) (OR. en) 10539/09 INF 151 API 81 JUR 263 ILMOITUS: I/A-KOHTA Lähettäjä: Tiedotustyöryhmä Vastaanottaja: Pysyvien edustajien komitea (Coreper II) / Neuvosto Ed. asiak. nro: 10538/09 Asia: Oikeus tutustua asiakirjoihin Christian SYRIERin uudistettu pyyntö 16/c/01/09 Valtuuskunnille toimitetaan liitteenä tiedotustyöryhmän 25. kesäkuuta 2009 pidetyn kokouksen tuloksien pohjalta laadittu ehdotus neuvoston vastaukseksi Christian SYRIERin uudistettuun pyyntöön 16/c/01/09. Alankomaiden, Suomen ja Ruotsin valtuuskunnat ilmoittivat äänestävänsä vastausehdotusta vastaan. Tässä yhteydessä annettiin seuraavat lausumat: NL: "Myös 2 5 kohta ja 10 kohdan ensimmäinen luetelmakohta olisi luovutettava, koska ne koskevat EY:n perustamissopimuksen 193 artiklan soveltamisalaa. Perusteita asiakirjojen joidenkin osien luovuttamisesta kieltäytymiselle olisi vielä tarkennettava." FI: "Suomi ei voi hyväksyä esitettyä tulkintaa, jonka mukaan kyseisissä asiakirjoissa olevat tiedot olisivat erityisen arkaluonteisia tai niiden ulottuvuus olisi erityisen laaja." 10539/09 pmm/pmm/ep 1 DG F FI

2 SE: "Ehdotus on asiassa Turco annetun tuomion vastainen. Ei ole olemassa sellaista todellista riskiä, joka olisi kohtuullisesti ennakoitavissa eikä olisi täysin hypoteettinen, että pyydettyjen asiakirjojen sisältämien tietojen ilmaiseminen voisi vahingoittaa 4 artiklan 2 kohdan toisessa alakohdassa tarkoitettua oikeudellisen neuvonannon suojaa." Valtuuskuntien enemmistö hyväksyi äänestystuloksen julkistamisen. Pysyvien edustajien komiteaa pyydetään näin ollen ehdottamaan, että neuvosto seuraavassa istunnossaan: hyväksyisi esityslistan A-kohtana tämän asiakirjan liitteenä olevan vastausehdotuksen (Alankomaiden, Suomen ja Ruotsin valtuuskunnat äänestävät ehdotusta vastaan); päättäisi julkistaa äänestystuloksen. Liite on saatavissa ainoastaan englanninkielisenä /09 pmm/pmm/ep 2 DG F FI

3 LIITE DRAFT REPLY ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL ON... TO CONFIRMATORY APPLICATION 16/c/01/09 made by Mr Christian SYRIER by on 29 May 2009, pursuant to Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, for public access to documents 11296/93 and 11183/94 The Council has considered this confirmatory application under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (OJ L 145 of , p. 43) and Annex II to the Council's Rules of Procedure (Council Decision 2006/683/EC, Euratom - OJ L 285 of , p. 47) and has come to the following conclusion: 1. The applicant refers to documents 11296/93 and 11183/94 which contain opinions of the Legal Service of the Council concerning questions put to it in the framework of the examination within the Council of the draft Decision of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on the detailed provisions governing the exercise of the European Parliament's right of inquiry. 2. In its reply dated 25 May 2009, the General Secretariat granted partial access to the introductory paragraph of each document. Access to the remaining parts of the documents was refused pursuant to Article 4(2), second indent, of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (protection of legal advice). 3. The Council notes that the applicant asked the institution to reconsider its position without bringing forward any arguments to support his confirmatory application. The Council thoroughly examined the requested documents and carried out new internal consultations within its General Secretariat to ascertain the applicability of the above-mentioned exception to the parts retained /09 3

4 4. Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 seeks to give the public the widest possible right of access to documents of the institutions, subject to the principles, conditions and limits defined in that Regulation. The second indent of Article 4(2) of the Regulation provides that the institution shall refuse access to a document where disclosure would undermine the protection of "court proceedings and legal advice", unless there is an overriding public interest in disclosure. 5. As stated above, the requested documents (11183/94 and 11296/93) contain opinions of the Council Legal Service concerning questions raised within the framework of the examination of a Draft Decision on the detailed provisions governing the exercise of the European Parliament's right of inquiry. The documents in question contain an analysis of delicate questions relating to the scope of the ex-article 138c of the EC Treaty (now Article 193 TEC) and the limits of the powers of the temporary committee on inquiry, as proposed in the draft. The Council considers that despite the fact that the decision-making process has already been concluded, the analysis contained in the requested documents remains particularly relevant, notably in the eventuality of the Council's participation in the proceedings before the temporary committee for inquiry. 6. In the view of the above, the legal advice contained in the requested documents is considered to be of particularly sensitive in nature, the disclosure of which would undermine the protection of legal advice as provided in Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001. Disclosure of the legal advice contained in the said documents would mean that the Council would have to take the risk of disclosure into account in the future, which might lead in practice to reluctance by the Council to ask for written opinions from its Legal Service. Furthermore, the Legal Service might itself refrain from putting into writing views which might expose the Council to risk in the future. As a result, the very purpose of the protection of legal advice, laid down by the Community legislator in the second indent of Article 4(2) of the Regulation, would be undermined. 7. As to the existence of an overriding public interest, the Council considers that given the particular circumstances of the case, notably the sensitive nature of the legal advice contained in the documents, the general principles of openness and the participation of the citizens in the 10539/09 4

5 institution's decision-making process would not prevail over the public interest in the protection of legal advice. 8. Finally, the Council also examined the possibility of granting partial access to the requested documents in accordance with Article 4(6) of Regulation No 1049/2001. It has found that, over and beyond the parts which have been disclosed by the General Secretariat in its initial reply, partial access may be granted to paragraphs 6-9 and the second indent of paragraph 10 of document 11296/93, since those parts are not covered by any exceptions under the Regulation /09 5