-
.
- Ελληνικά
The appeal of the Attorney General of the Republic
The order for access to classified documents, granted by the Administrative Court for International Protection to an asylum seeker, was annulled by the Court of Appeal in a unanimous decision dated 20 February 2024, accepting the appeal lodged by the Attorney General of the Republic.
The applicant had applied to the Asylum Service (Ministry of the Interior) for international protection status. On grounds relating to the security of Cypriot society and of the Republic, the Asylum Service rejected his application, at the same time excluding him from being granted subsidiary protection status. The applicant, not accepting the decision of the Asylum Service, brought an action before the Administrative Court for International Protection seeking disclosure of Asylum Service documents contained in his file, seeking, in effect, access to all the information (including classified documents) on which the Asylum Service had relied to reject him. That person's application to the Administrative Court for International Protection was successful, with the Advocate General of the Republic appealing against that decision at first instance. At the same time, the same court granted the request of the Attorney General of the Republic to suspend the decision issued by the Court of Appeal to grant the applicant access to the classified documents, pending the decision of the Court of Appeal.
Hearing the case, the Court of Appeal found the appeal of the Attorney General of the Republic to be well-founded, noting that, under European Union law, the applicant's right of access to documents is not absolute but, "on the contrary, may be limited by the Court, by balancing the applicant's right (which is a manifestation of the right of access to justice which he enjoys before the Court) with the administration's interest in protecting national security by not disclosing sensitive information'. Consequently, non-disclosure to the applicant of the information is possible and justified if such disclosure "would in a direct and concrete way compromise national security, inter alia, by endangering the life, health or freedom of third parties, or by revealing the special investigation methods of the national security authorities."
Reference is also made by the Court of Appeal to national law, namely, the "Classified Information Security Ordinance 2013 (C.I.P. 410/2013)", to note that "the trial court had an active obligation to assess of its own motion whether the disclosure of a classified document is likely to harm the vital interests of the Republic, as described in paragraph 4 (2) of the same Decree".
Therefore, the Court of Appeal set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance and awarded costs in favour of the Republic.
On behalf of the Attorney General of the Republic, the case was handled by Ms Athanasia A. Achilleos and Penelope Charalambous, lawyers of the Republic.
26 February 2024
Contents of this article including associated images are belongs PIO
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or PIO
Source
