We bring together information on the legal frameworks for the right to information from more than 100 countries.
You are here: Home Cases Petitioner v. Procuraduria General de la Republica (Public Prosecutor)

Petitioner v. Procuraduria General de la Republica (Public Prosecutor)

Case number:
Date of decision:
5 September 2007
Court / Arbiter:
Information Commission (Instituto General de Acceso a la Informacion Publica, or IFAI). ( Appellate )


The public prosecutor must properly disclose to Petitioner information on the number and status of preliminary investigations formerly conducted by the Special Prosecutor for Social & Political Movements of the Past.

Court papers (including case files, court orders)
Format (of information requested, the request itself, appeal)
Judicial information (administrative information, appointments, career information, case-load statistics)
Law enforcement / Administration of justice (including prevention/investigation/prosecution of crime, due process)
Oversight bodies (including information commission, judicial review, ombuds office)
RTI law

Case details:


In May 2007, Petitioner requested from the public prosecutor (Procuraduria General de la Republica, or PGR) a report on the “status of preliminary investigations formerly undertaken by the Special Prosecutor for Social & Political Movements of the Past” (FEMOSPP) including information on which investigations remained open and how many had been archived, and what offices and which public officials were handling them [p.1].

The PGR refused to comply with such a request alleging that information was reserved under Articles 14(I) and (III) of the Federal Transparency and Access to Public Governmental Information Law (RTI Law) and Article 16 of the Federal Code of Criminal Procedure (FCCP), which allow disclosure only to the parties involved in criminal proceedings [pp.1-2].

In a hearing held in July 2007, the PGR subsequently modified its initial stance and agreed to disclose information on the status of former FEMOSPP preliminary investigations including how many of them remained open, in which office they were located, who was assigned to each investigation and how many investigations had been archived [p.4]. In August 2007, the PGR filed its response precisely outlining each of these items with IFAI [pp.5-7].



IFAI analysed the information furnished by the PGR and determined it was sufficient and adequately addressed all items of Petitioner’s request [pp.8-11]. IFAI noted, however, that the PGR furnished no evidence that this information had been properly made available to Petitioner [p.11]. Therefore, it instructed the PGR to hand it over to Petitioner within 10 business days [pp.11-12].



IFAI administrative resolution