Article 41 - Right to good administration
Key facts of the case:
On 1 February 2021, P.S. sent a request to the Municipality of M. for disclosure of public information, in the scope of providing him with information on the expenses incurred for the renovation and maintenance of the road. By letter of 11 February 2021, the Municipality provided information to P.S.. However, in the complainant's opinion, the information obtained from the authority was imprecise, and the complainant sent a letter to the authority on 2 March 2021, requesting that the information provided be clarified. The authority, in the letter of 29 April 2021, provided P.S. with documents and other information related to his request.
As a result, P. S. filed a complaint against the inactivity of the Mayor of the City and Municipality of M. related to his application for disclosure of public information.
By the judgment of 1 June 2022, the Szczecin Voivodship Administrative Court held that the Mayor of the Town and Municipality M., had been inactive in examining the applicant's request. The justification indicated that the Mayor violated the right to good administration specified in Art. 41 of the Charter - the court underlined that each case must be heard within a reasonable time. However, the court found that this inaction was not blatant.
Key legal question raised by the Court:
A key aspect of the judgment was the introduction of a definition of inactivity of public authorities in the context of extension of the term of examination of citizen's applications.
The Court indicated that the inactivity of the authority consisting in not using the competence which, due to the existence of legal circumstances, the authority is obliged to use, is a specific manifestation of the illegal behaviour of public administration, constituting a violation of Art. 41 of the Charter.
Outcome of the case:
The court found that the Mayor remained inactive in the period from 2-29 April 2021. The court emphasized that such a period of inactivity may be considered as inaction resulting in the violation of Art. 41 of the Charter. Therefore, the court awarded reimbursement of the cost of court proceedings to P.S. in the amount of PLN 597.00 and obliged the Mayor to examine P.S.’ request within 30 days from the date of receipt of the final judgment.
“In this context, inactivity of a public administration body is a situation where, within the legally set deadline, this authority has not taken the requested actions in the case or has been slow in conducting the proceedings, but - despite the statutory obligation - has not completed it by issuing a decision, order or other act on time or has not taken relevant act (see the Supreme Administrative Court in the judgment of 5 February 1999, I SAB 90/98). The inaction of the authority, i.e. failure to use the competence which, due to the occurrence of the circumstances required by law, the authority is obliged to use, is a specific manifestation of the illegality of the behaviour of the public administration (see M. Miłosz, The inaction of a public administration authority in administrative proceedings, Warsaw 2012, p. 92). Inactivity understood in this way constitutes a violation of the EU citizen's right to good administration. The right to good administration results from Art. 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (Official Journal, UE.C.2007.303.1). One of the fundamental elements of this law is, pursuant to Art. 41(1) of that Charter, the right to be dealt with within a reasonable time by the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union.”
‘W tym kontekście bezczynność organu administracji publicznej to sytuacja, gdy w prawnie ustalonym terminie organ ten nie podjął żądanych czynności w sprawie lub opieszale prowadził postępowanie, ale - mimo ustawowego obowiązku - nie zakończył go wydaniem w terminie decyzji, postanowienia lub też innego aktu lub nie podjął stosownej czynności (por. NSA w wyroku z 5 lutego 1999 r., I SAB 90/98). Bezczynność organu, czyli niekorzystanie z kompetencji, którą ze względu na zaistnienie wymaganych przez prawo okoliczności organ jest obowiązany wykorzystać, stanowi specyficzny przejaw nielegalności zachowań administracji publicznej (por. M. Miłosz, Bezczynność organu administracji publicznej w postępowaniu administracyjnym, Warszawa 2012 r., s. 92 i nast.). Tak rozumiana bezczynność oznacza naruszenie prawa obywatela UE do dobrej administracji. Prawo do dobrej administracji wynika z treści art. 41 Karty praw podstawowych Unii Europejskiej (Dz.U.UE.C.2007.303.1). Jednym z fundamentalnych elementów tego prawa jest w myśl art. 41 ust. 1 tej Karty, prawo do rozpoznania sprawy w rozsądnym terminie przez instytucje, organy i jednostki organizacyjne Unii.’
