Case: Challenging refusal to provide information
Yuriy Reznikov versus Chief Sanitary Doctor of Khmelnytsk oblast
Region: Khmelnytsk oblast, city of Khmelnytskyi
Essence of case: Protection of the right of citizens to the environmental information
Parties: Yuriy Reznikov – plaintiff, The Chief Sanitary Doctor of Khmelnytsk oblast – defendant
Essence of problem: Court proceeding on the complaint on the wrongful inactivity of the Chief Sanitary Doctor of Khmelnytsk oblast, receiving of the environmental information
Main facts:
Yuriy Reznikov, the representative of the Society of Nature Protection, asked EPL to provide him legal assistance.
Yuriy Reznikov found out that the company “Pilat” was building the gasoline station near the river South Bug in the city of Khmelnytskyi. He requested the Chief Sanitary Doctor of Khmelnytsk oblast to provide information on the station’s construction and on possible impact on environment and health in the city of Khmelnytskyi. He received the answer, which violated his rights. In particular, the received answer didn’t include the requested information. The requested information was not classified as information with limited access. They had to provide it within the required period.
Furthermore, the Chief Sanitary Doctor advised to request this information from the Khmelnytsk Sanitary Epidemiological Station. According to the article 7 of the Law of Ukraine “On Citizens’ Appeal”, if the requested issues don’t fall within the discretion of the body, which received the request, it has to forward the request to the appropriate institution or official within period not exceeding 5 days.
The Chief Sanitary Doctor violated the rights and interests of Yuriy Reznikov. These rights and interests are provided in the Constitution of Ukraine, the Laws of Ukraine “On information”, “On Citizens’ Appeal”, “On Ensuring of Sanitary and Epidemiological Safety of the Population”.
EPL prepared the complaint on behalf of citizen. Yuriy Reznikov challenged the activities of the Chief Sanitary Doctor and asked the Court to oblige the Chief Sanitary Doctor to provide the necessary information.
On July 2, 1999, the Court ruled in Reznikov’s favor. It declared as illegal the inactivity of the Chief Sanitary Doctor and obliged to answer to the request.
