Freedom of Information Center of Armenia.

հայերեն | english

Strategic litigation

Court cases

41. The FOICA vs. the Ministry of Urban Development

15.09.2013

On April 3, 2013, the Freedom of Information Center sent a written information request to the Ministry of Urban Development asking to provide the copies of procurement contracts of the Ministry of Urban Development for the second half of 2012.

The Ministry of Urban Development has refused to provide the requested information, claiming that it contains trade secrets of the organizations with whom the contracts were signed. This refusal was considered unjustified, because on the one hand, it is about the money spent from the state budget and public procurement, and on the other hand, the procurement contracts are public documents, as many times (in different years) such contracts were published by various state bodies, including the all RA ministries.

By this reasoning, on June 24, 2013, the FOICA sent the second information request to the Ministry of Urban Development once again asking for the copies of procurement contracts of the Ministry. But this request also got a refusal.

On September 3, 2013, the FOICA filed a suit at the RA Administrative Court against the Ministry of Urban Development, asking the Court to recognize the fact of violation of the right of FOICA to receive information, oblige the Ministry to provide the requested information and to impose an administrative penalty on the Minister of Urban Development Samvel Tadevosyan.

The Ministry of Urban Development has agreed with the FOICA upon publication of the information, which has became a subject to court case, i. e. the Ministry agreed to ensure publication (downloadable) of the 19 procurement contracts of the Ministry of Urban Development for the second half of 2012 either via the www.gov.am website of the RA government, or via the official website of the Ministry  thus the FOICA has applied to the court with a motion to dismiss the case. By its decision dated February 4, 2015 the RA Administrative Court dismissed the court case.

 

← Back to the list

Share |