In camera

An in -camera method (Latin for in camera in the chamber, so "secret" ) under German law a special intermediate proceedings in the administrative process, in which the confidential status will be reviewed in court proceedings significant information. In doing so, the court must obtain information ( documents, files, etc.) that are given to the public or the parties to the dispute known or made ​​available. The decision- relevant information are then determined only for the eyes of the court and thus remain " in the chamber ". As a result of the in -camera process is determined whether the authority must keep the records rightly secret.

Current state of legislation

Authorities in relation to the administrative courts acc. § 99 Section 1 Sentence 1 Code of Administrative Procedure in principle obliged to produce documents or files for the transmission of electronic documents and information. This - gained by the court upon application or ex officio ( § 86 Code of Administrative Procedure ) - knowledge is the adversary to access as this one has right to inspect records ( § 100 Code of Administrative Procedure ). Furthermore, such information may also be generally publicized because acc. § 55 Code of Administrative Procedure i.V.m. § 169 GVG the court proceedings are public.

However, if the disclosure would be detrimental to the Federation or of a country or when the tasks by a law or by their nature must be held by secret, the highest competent supervisory authority may request submission of documents or files, transmission of the electronic documents and issuing of information acc. § 99 Section 1 Sentence 2 refuse Code of Administrative Procedure. On request of a party then the University Senate shall decide in accordance pursuant to § 189 Code of Administrative Procedure of the Federal Administrative Court or the Supreme Administrative Court. § 99 paragraph 2 Code of Administrative Procedure of whether the denial of information provision is lawful. The highest supervisory authority has refused to submit the information on this call saying the body; the in- camera process is subject to the rules of the classification. The decision grounds shall not reveal the nature and content of the information kept secret. A corresponding method, § 86 FGO before the financial process.

Development

The in- camera method was first introduced by the law to clean up the appellate law in the administrative process by 20 December 2001. Even before that was able to decide whether had been made by the defiant authority sufficiently credible that the statutory requirements for the refusal templates the court; However, it could not inspect the records to judge refused, because according to the old law, the information would have been counted as introduced in the process and so the Complaining Party would become known.

While internationally an in- camera process was not uncommon ( see, for example method according to the Freedom of Information Act of the United States or the " Huberschwiller 'case-law of the State in France), the case law and legislation heretofore German startled back decades.

1999, however, the Federal Constitutional Court that the old § 99 Section 1 Sentence decided within the framework of a constitutional complaint, 2 in conjunction with Section 2 Sentence 1 Code of Administrative Procedure A. F. is incompatible with the legal guarantee of Article 19, paragraph 4 of the Constitution, insofar as it excludes the submission of files even in those cases where the granting effective judicial protection depends on the knowledge of management operations. It made ​​it clear that the restriction of the right to inspect records of the parties in accordance. § 100, paragraph 1 is compatible with respect to the Code of Administrative Procedure to be announced only for the decisive spell body information ( including the just and documents) with the right to be heard according to Article 103 § 1 of the Basic Law, if only through this limitation of Article 19 Section 4 of the Constitution can provide effective legal protection offered.

Whether the currently applicable provisions of § 99 Code of Administrative Procedure complies with the constitutional requirements, is still controversial, as an in -camera- exploitation for the benefit of the legal protection seekers is still excluded.