Working Group for Chapter 23 – Addressing Challenges in the Implementation of the Right to Information: Capacity Gaps, Unsupported Refusals, and Key Obstacles, 13 November 2025

A discussion roundtable was held in Tirana on 13 November, organized by the European Movement in Albania (EMA) and the Commissioner for the Right to Information and Protection of Personal Data, within the framework of the National Convention for European Integration. The event focused on the right to information, institutional challenges, and the role of civil society in strengthening transparency and accountability.

The meeting was opened by EMA’s Executive Director, Gledis Gjipali, who emphasized the particular importance of this discussion in the context of EU integration. He highlighted that Albania is now assessed and monitored by the EU not only on how it transposes European standards into national legislation, but also on the functioning of institutional capacities and the actual impact of these standards in practice. Gjipali underlined that aligning national legislation with EU standards is not a simple process, and that successful transposition requires stronger engagement from public institutions as well as broader participation from non-state actors and stakeholders—including civil society, academia, the media, and other relevant groups.

Elona Hoxhaj, Director General at the Office of the Commissioner for the Right to Information and Protection of Personal Data, praised the organization of the event, noting that such forums are essential not only for sharing achievements and developments, but also for identifying challenges and gaps in implementation. She stressed that access to public information is not merely an obligation for public administration—it is a fundamental right of every Albanian citizen. Referring to the European Commission’s latest assessment, Hoxhaj noted that progress in this area is crucial for the overall EU integration process, as the right to information is deeply linked with good governance and fundamental rights. She assessed the new Law on Public Information as one of the most advanced globally—fully transposing European and international standards and, in some aspects, going beyond them. However, she underlined that implementation remains the main challenge, as Albania has only 11 years of experience with this right, compared to EU countries with far longer traditions. She also explained that the new law makes every public official responsible for providing information, replacing the earlier model where only information coordinators held this responsibility. Hoxhaj shared data from 2024, noting around 12,000 information requests and roughly 1,000 complaints submitted to the Commissioner’s Office. The most common reasons for failure to provide information include negligence, heavy workload, or claims of confidentiality or unclear requests. She emphasized the need to continue strengthening the culture of transparency across institutions, stakeholders, and the general public.

Emerlinda Pema Guri, Director of Transparency Program Monitoring at the Commissioner’s Office, stressed that the right to public information—although not regulated through a dedicated EU directive—is a horizontal right that affects many policy areas and negotiation chapters. She explained that in Albania’s EU negotiation process, this right is addressed primarily under Chapter 23, Chapter 10, and the Political Criteria, all linked to public administration, transparency, and good governance. She highlighted the importance of proactive transparency, requiring public authorities to regularly publish their Transparency Programme online. She also emphasized that handling requests and complaints related to the right to information is a core function of the Commissioner’s Office, and that providing information remains a duty for every public authority and responsible official.

Following the institutional presentations, Michal Piško, Director of Transparency International Slovakia, took the floor. He explained that some of the examples he would present were not positive, despite Slovakia being an EU Member State. He noted that recent amendments to Slovakia’s right-to-information legislation have resulted in regression, including the extension of response deadlines to 12 working days without any prior impact assessment. Another challenge he highlighted was the absence of an independent oversight authority in Slovakia—complaints are handled by the same institutions or must go to court, where proceedings may take up to five years. He added that, unlike in Albania, Slovakia’s law includes as obligated entities health insurance institutions, NGOs, and companies that receive public funds, all required to provide public information. As a successful example, Piško mentioned the mandatory online publication of local government contracts and invoices, which are only considered valid once published, as well as the establishment of a central state registry for local government contracts since 2020.

During the open discussion with participants from civil society, academia, the media, students, and public information coordinators, several issues were addressed. These included: the distinction between documents that must be published and those exempt from disclosure; communication between the Commissioner and public authorities; transparency obligations for private institutions offering public services (such as education); the difference between negligence and deliberate refusal of information requests; the need for digitalizing frequently asked questions; and obligations for transparency in public procurement, along with the protection of sensitive data.