Hej listan,
"How deep does the rabbit hole go?" (Det är en retorisk fråga).
Så "vi" (jag är en vanlig medborgare) styrs av lagar som ingen som inte ens än de mest kvalificerade experterna kan förstå. Det känns tryggt...
"Folket" måste skyddas från sig självt = Sekretess.
Stort demokratiskt underskott... Mig det tycks vara (a la Stjärnornas krig)
/19x20*
*(Nej, 19x20 har inget med jonas att göra och jonas har ingenting med Jonas Sissokho att göra och nej 19x20, jonas, Jonas Sissokho har ingenting med resurface.se att göra och viktigast av allt: 19x20@resurface.se och jonas@resurface.se har ABSOLUT ingenting med varandra att göra.)
On 2013-10-23 19:17, Erik Josefsson wrote:
Apropå att dra slipsten, det här är enligt mig det viktigaste caset det här seklet.
Om ombudsmannen fipplar bort detta så fipplas hela meningen med EU bort.
Erik Josefsson BE GSM: +32484082063 SE GSM: +46707696567
----- Forwarded message ----- Från: "Ante Wessels" ante@ffii.org Till: "iindep info exchange hub" hub@iindep.org Rubrik: [iindep-hub] Will the Ombudsman rise to the occassion? Datum: ons, okt 23, 2013 18:59
Will the Ombudsman rise to the occassion? http://acta.ffii.org/?p=1956 with links
October 23, 2013 By Ante
A few weeks ago I filed a complaint with the Ombudsman against the European Parliament over the secrecy of legal advice regarding ACTA. The Ombudsman replied that she didn’t want to investigate the complaint as I already got access to the documents (unofficially released versions). In a letter I ask her to reconsider the decision, as the decision seems not in line with an earlier Ombudsman decision, and, more importantly, an investigation could be of major importance.
Key paragraphs:
"The secrecy surrounding international negotiations is very problematic. For instance, the secrecy surrounding ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) led to various European Parliament resolutions, two Ombudsman complaints and a Court case.
All these cases failed, as the "protection of the public interest as regards international relations" exception to openness has an "absolute" character. Once successfully invoked, the Institution does not have to balance it with the public interest in disclosure.
The Parliament even raised this international relations exception, that has such a devastating effect on openness, for legal advice it produced itself after the negotiations. This extends the brute force of the international relations exception beyond reasonable scope. The Parliament uses the international relations exception to negate landmark EU Court of Justice Turco case law on legal advice. In my complaint I challenge this over-extension by arguing that the Parliament erred in law. Challenging this over-extension and defending the landmark Turco case law on legal advice is of major importance.
Furthermore, I challenge the "absolute" character of the international relations exception by pointing out it is not compatible with human rights. If this reasoning finds acceptance, it may break the absolute character of the exception. It could lead to more open negotiations of international agreements. This would be of major importance too."
The letter (pdf) ___________________________________________________________________________ iindep info hub - hub@iindep.org - https://listes.globenet.org/listinfo/hub policy: * do NOT forward mails or non-public information from this list * new subscribers must be approved by a list member * messages from non-members addresses are bounced back list admin is Nil (mailto:hub-owner@iindep.org, he rarely reads the list)