## Facts

- Attorney Guillermo Cochez Farrugia requested from Panama’s Ministry of the Presidency a copy of any contract on file signed by Costa Rican national Anabell (Anabella) Diez de Rodríguez.
- The Minister of the Presidency confirmed that a contract existed but refused to provide a copy.
- The Ministry stated that the contract contained personal data regarding a government employee and therefore could be disclosed only to a “directly interested party,” which it asserted Cochez Farrugia was not.
- After the refusal, Cochez Farrugia filed a constitutional action for *hábeas data* in the Supreme Court of Justice (Plenary), seeking an order compelling disclosure of the contract.
- The dispute arose in the context of Panama’s constitutional right to access information held by the State and the transparency framework reflected in Law No. 6 of 2002.

## Issues

1. Whether *hábeas data* may be used by a private citizen to compel an executive ministry to provide a copy of a government contract in its files.
2. Whether the Ministry may deny access to a contract because it contains personal data and the requester is not a “directly interested party.”
3. What limits, if any, privacy protections place on disclosure of state-held contracting or employment-related documents.

## Decision

- The Court rejected the Ministry’s blanket refusal to provide a copy of the contract based only on the presence of personal data and the claimed “direct interest” requirement.
- The Court treated a contract held by the State in connection with public functions and public resources as information subject to access through *hábeas data*.
- The Court recognized that legitimately private details may justify limited protection (such as withholding specific fields or redacting sensitive items), but not categorical nondisclosure of the entire contract.
- The judgment was not unanimous; dissents were recorded.

## Legal Principles

- State-held documents tied to public functions, including contracts kept by government entities, are generally accessible through constitutional access-to-information remedies, including *hábeas data*.
- A public authority that refuses disclosure bears the responsibility to justify the refusal under a recognized exception; exceptions are applied narrowly.
- The fact that a record contains personal data does not automatically convert the whole document into confidential material; privacy protection is addressed through tailored measures (for example, redaction of sensitive personal details) rather than total denial.
- Access to government contracting information is not conditioned on showing a special individualized status as a “directly interested party” when the request concerns public administration and the use of public authority or funds.

## Conclusion

In *Guillermo Cochez Farrugia v. Minister of the Presidency*, the Panama Supreme Court (Plenary) treated a government contract in the Ministry’s files as presumptively accessible through *hábeas data* and found that privacy objections based on personal data support, at most, limited redactions rather than a complete refusal to provide the contract.


Guillermo Cochez Farrugia v. Minister of the Presidency, Exped. No. HD472-2002 (2003)