Judgment No. 3120
1. The decision of 23 March 2010, insofar as it did not allow the complainant access to, and copies of his complete medical file, as well as the opportunity to add a note to his file to correct any inaccuracies or omissions, is set aside.
2. The letter of 25 May 2010 is invalid.
3. The OPCW shall allow the complainant to submit a note for inclusion in his medical file, correcting any aspect of it which he deems to be inaccurate or incomplete.
4. The Organisation shall pay the complainant 5,000 euros in moral damages.
5. It shall also pay him 1,000 euros in costs.
6. All other claims are dismissed.
Considerations 6 & 7
"The Tribunal is of the opinion that in principle, in the absence of specific rules or regulations governing the right of a staff member to access his or her own medical file, that right must be considered to comprehend the right to view and obtain copies of all records and notes in the file, and to add relevant notes to correct any part of the file considered wrong or incomplete. So stated, that right gives effect to the Organisation’s duty of transparency. [...] [I]t is clear from [Judgments 1684, 2045 and 2047] that, while there may be some cases in which it is not advisable to allow staff members to have full access to their medical file at a particular point in time (and the decision to deny access temporarily must be fully justified and reasonable), the right to transparency as well as the general principle of an individual’s right to access personal data concerning him or her mean that a staff member must be allowed full and unfettered access to his or her medical file and be provided with copies of the full file when requested (paying the associated costs as necessary). [...] It must be pointed out that the staff member’s right to add a note to his or her medical file with a view to correcting any aspect considered wrong or incomplete is consistent with the Organisation’s duty of transparency and with the right of that staff member to ensure the accuracy of his or her personal information."
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 1684, 2045, 2047
complaint allowed in part; duty to substantiate decision; international civil servant; formal requirements; exception; general principle; organisation's duties; duty to inform; no provision; medical records; date; refusal; right