Facts
Journalist [A.] requested the Federal Office of Transport (FOT) to inspect the complete and non-anonymized entries of the 26 most important transport companies in Switzerland in the New Incident Database (NEDB) from January 1, 2012. The FOT informed him that it could not grant him access to the hazards, disruptions, and damage amounts recorded in the NEDB without the consent of the affected transport companies.
[A.] filed a conciliation request with the Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (FDPIC). During the conciliation proceedings, an agreement was reached regarding the damage amounts. Regarding the hazards and disruptions, the FDPIC suggested granting access.
The FOT rejected the request for access, except for what had already been granted before and during the conciliation proceedings. [A.] then filed a complaint with the Federal Administrative Court, which upheld the appeal and overturned the FOT's decision. The Federal Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communications (DETEC), represented by the FOT, appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court dismisses the appeal, insofar as it enters into it.
According to the case law, for a ground for confidentiality under Art. 7 para. 1 BGÖ, the threat of violation of public or private interests in the event of granting access must be serious and likely to occur. An actual balancing of interests is not required.
However, if an official document contains personal data that cannot be anonymized, a comprehensive weighing of interests must be carried out under…