From: Merit Kaasik <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 12:30 PM
To: Kristi Värk <[email protected]>; Kristin Kaur
<[email protected]>
Cc: Aino Lepik von Wiren <[email protected]>; Kirsti
Anipai-Tõniste <[email protected]>; Kristi Land
<[email protected]>; Mai Hion <[email protected]>
Subject: Läti JuM küsimused seoses Tromso konventsiooniga

Tere!

Edastan LV justiitsministeeriumi palve vastata allpool olevatele
küsimustele seoses „official document“ mõiste tõlgendamisega Tromso
konventsioonis.
Vastuseid paluvad 6. septembriks.

Tervitades
Merit

Merit Kaasik
Permanent Representation of
Estonia to the Council of Europe
Deputy to the
Permanent Representative
Tel +33 388 247 652
Mob +33 640 400 222

From: TM eld <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 9:35 AM
To: Esindus Strasbourgis üldaadress (e-mail) <[email protected]>;
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; TM eld <[email protected]>
Subject: Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official documents_use
of term “official document”

Dear Sir / Madam,

Latvia acceded to the Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official
documents on 17 April 2024 and intends to ratify it later this year.

Parliamentarians of the Saeima (Parliament) raised the question of
interpretation of the content of the Convention term “official document”
and possible restrictions on access to official documents in practice,
taking into account the place of international norms in the hierarchy of
external laws and regulations (for example, in case of contradictions,
etc.). Our aim is to identify the practices of Convention enforcers in
atypical cases, in order to ascertain whether we correctly interpret the
content of the term “official document” (which we believe is currently in
line with national legislation) and any restrictions on access to official
documents, as well as to ensure that the Convention has adequate access to
official documents and national legislation.

Therefore, could you please answer the following questions:
1. Has your country requested and granted access to official documents on
the basis of the Convention (applying the interpretation of the
Convention) after ratification of the Convention (including adaptation of
the national legislation), thereby broadening the content of the national
legislation applied in practice? If yes, please briefly describe the case
(including what official documents they were - type, form, etc.).

2. Has your country, when ratifying the Convention or after ratifying the
Convention, needed to make changes to the national legislation regarding
the content of the term “official document” (such as their nature, form)
and what changes were made? Is this term currently aligned with the bodies
supervising the implementation of the Convention? Please indicate in the
reply how the State has defined the content of the term “official
document” in the national legislation in force.

3. Whether your State has received objections from the authorities
supervising the implementation of the Convention regarding the
implementation of the Convention (e.g. on the practice of applying the
Convention or the non-compliance of national legislation)? If so, please
describe, as far as possible, their content.

We would highly appreciate it if you could share your responses by
September 6th.

Sincerely,
The Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Latvia
Brivibas blvd 36, Riga
LV 1536, Latvia
[email protected]
[email protected]
www.tm.gov.lv

Šis e-pasts un tā pielikumā esošie dokumenti var saturēt ierobežotas
pieejamības informāciju, cita starpā fizisko personu datus, kas adresēta
tikai tā saņēmējam un izmantojama tikai leģitīmiem mērķiem. Ja esat
saņēmis šo e-pastu kļūdas dēļ, vai nav pamatota mērķa ierobežotas
pieejamības informācijas, cita starpā fizisko personu datu, apstrādei,
Jums nav tiesību izmantot vai pārsūtīt šajā e-pastā un tam pievienotajos
dokumentos ietverto informāciju. Šādā gadījumā nekavējoties
neatgriezeniski izdzēsiet šo e-pastu.