Sekretess för affärsrelaterad information i myndigheters affärsverksamhet - särskilt med fokus på kommunala bolag

Sammanfattning: It is not uncommon for Swedish public authorities to run their own business enterprises. Some of the most frequent examples are companies owned by local municipalities, which for example provide apartments with right of tenancy. However, these enterprises are somewhat different from privately owned businesses. This is because of the Principle of Public Access, which guarantees a certain amount of transparency in the activities run by public authorities. On the other hand, there is a need for beeing able to classify certain information, if publicity could cause economic damage to the business. One can for instance imagine situations, where a competitor would use the Principle of Public Access to gain personal advantage. Certain price lists, or budget documents could be valuable resources for a company that competes with a publically owned business enterprise. The balance between these two interests is a question that needs careful consideration by the legislator. In the Swedish law of publicity and secrecy (OSL), companies run by a local municipality, and where the authorities have the majority vote, on a shareholders meeting, are equal to a public authority, in the matter of Public Access. The government has stated that there should not be any difference between an authority and such a company run by a local municipality, when it comes to publicity and transparency. This essay is, therefore, based on two questions. The first question is on what grounds business-related information could be classified by a public authority. The other question is whether it makes any difference to the possibilities of classifying information, if the enterprise is such a company run by a local municipality. A closer analysis will be made of some central rules of importance, about secrecy in the Swedish public management, and the application of those rules. Furthermore, the essay will show that a few differences regarding publicity exist, if the enterprise is run as a company, and not in a common public-authority-form.