Resolutions, opinions and reports search tool

The data protection regulations do not prevent the complainant from communicating the information he requests, regarding access to his clinical history, including the identity of the professionals, rank and professional category, who have accessed it.

Given that at the time of the application for access the selection body has not assessed the merits claimed by the participants in the selection process, access to the documentation accrediting these merits (or to the spreadsheet in which they are related) would not be justified, without prejudice to the fact that, once their assessment has been carried out, access can be recognised with regard to, if applicable, those participants who have finally been selected or who have obtained a better position in the job exchange with respect to the claimant.

The right to data protection would not prevent the claimant from accessing the requested public information that only contains aggregated data. Likewise, in view of the concurrent circumstances in the specific case, it would be justified to release pseudonymized information on the distribution of cases among the lawyers assigned to the TOAD, with an indication of the associated incidences, as well as on the invoices presented by these lawyers, for the period between 2018 and 2022. However, the information on the persons assisted by the TOAD lawyers that may be included would have to be omitted, in any case.

Data protection regulations would not prevent access to the statements of the practical and theoretical exams, along with the correction criteria, proposed in the selective process referred to in the petition, but as regards obtaining a copy of the exams in question, their submission in the specific case examined would only be possible after anonymisation of this information.

Data protection regulations do not prevent the claimant from having access to information concerning public employees who had intervened in the various previous research actions and disciplinary proceedings processed between 2020 and 2022, both of which have been resolved and who have not participated in the irregular conduct, unless there are exceptional circumstances. However, in accordance with the fundamentals that have been laid down, access to the files can be facilitated through the anonymisation mechanism or, where this measure is not effective, through a summary of the files, so that in no case are the natural persons concerned (people investigated and, if applicable, complainants or witnesses) identifiable.

On the basis of the information that the city council has provided for consultation, data protection regulations would not prevent access to the number of disciplinary files initiated in 2022. However, in the event that the applicant is interested in accessing other information that exceeds the number of disciplinary proceedings initiated, the City Council must analyse the possibility of access according to the categories of personal data concerned, taking into consideration the grounds that have been set out.

Data protection regulations would not allow the trade union delegate to access a copy of the payrolls of the work staff affected by the application for access. However, it is possible to communicate the information contained in payrolls in an aggregate way, so as to ensure that they are not identified.

Local government regulations and extensive jurisprudence regulate and specify the right of councilors to obtain all background information, data or information held by the services of the local corporation and necessary for the exercise of their functions. In the event that the requested information contains personal data, as in the case raised in the consultation, the councilor's access could be justified for the exercise of the general functions attributed to the full body of the corporation related to the control and supervision of the bodies. of government, in cases in which the judicial processes are related to issues related to the professional field and linked to the functions in the municipal government of those accused or investigated and not linked to issues of the private or personal sphere of these. Access could also be justified, in cases in which the councilor has functions directly related to the control of the representation and defense of the corporation, with the legal defense of the case, or in another matter directly related to the judicial procedures in progress. . All this, without prejudice to the result of the weighing of the rights at stake, and taking into account the circumstances of each specific case, it will be considered that the right to data protection of the affected persons must be preserved.

Data protection regulations do not prevent access to purely identifying data from professionals who have drafted the reports, or appear in the documentation requested for the performance of their duties. However, in accordance with the fundamentals that have been laid down, with regard to information relating to categories of data that are especially protected, in particular data relating to the health of residents, access must be provided through an extract or summary of the reports issued by the primary care centre, so that the physical persons concerned are not identifiable.

With the information available, it can be concluded that the jobs of A17 officials who are not LITERate (heads of department) can be considered to be places of special trust, of special responsibility within the organisation or of high pay. Access to individualised information on the pay of public workers must, in principle, be limited to senior managers and staff as well as to staff who hold positions of special trust, of special responsibility within the organisation or high level in the hierarchy of the entity, of free designation, or who carry a high level of pay. With regard to other public workers, the public interest in controlling public activity with regard to the destination of resources could also be satisfied without sacrificing the privacy of the persons concerned in such a way that information must be provided aggregated by groups and levels of intervals. As regards the three-year period of these workers, it would be in line with data protection regulations to provide information grouped by categories or by groups and levels of intervals. It is generally not considered appropriate to data protection regulations to provide information relating to the description, chronologically speaking, of the administrative situation of an entire group of officials throughout their administrative career, whether they are management staff or special responsibility or whether it affects other groups of officials.