The Court of Appeal embraced the arguments put forward that privacy rights should only limit journalistic freedoms where this is truly necessary to protect the same rights of the individuals concerned, and that privacy claims should not be used merely as an excuse to limit an information request made in the public interest by investigative media outlets that are recognised by the European Court of Human Rights as "public watchdogs".
The Court also upheld the argument that individuals that exercise a public function (in this case, acting on a public tender adjudication board) paid by public funds cannot expect their name not to be divulged to the public. The divulging of such information is necessary to ensure transparency of the process and accountability of the persons involved and does not constitute a breach of privacy, such as to limit the information from being provided and divulged.
Click here to read the article on the timesofmalta.com
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.