Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
111.1 KV CH-SG

Art. 60 Costituzione del Cantone di San Gallo (KV) - Informazioni

VI. Autorità - 1. Principi
Apri la fonte ufficiale Atto completo (127 Articoli) Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Art. 60 KV · Informazioni

1. Le autorità informano di propria iniziativa o su richiesta riguardo alla loro attività, purché non vi siano interessi pubblici o privati degni di protezione che si oppongano.

2. La legge disciplina la diffusione delle informazioni e l'accesso alle informazioni ufficiali.

← Art. 59 KV - Durata del Mandato Costituzione del Cantone di San Gallo (KV) - Canton San Gallo Art. 61 KV - Immunità →

Ti chiedi come si applica questa disposizione alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa norma insieme alla giurisprudenza, ai commentari e alle disposizioni correlate in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Decisioni giudiziarie che applicano questa disposizione (12)

B.2022.81 · sg (Art. 60 Abs. 1 KV)
Access to Water Consumption Data Upheld Against Trade Secret Claim
The provision establishing the general duty of authorities to inform unless public or private interests oppose it, which is implicitly confirmed by the court's decision to grant access.
B.2022.81 · sg (Art. 60 Abs. 1 KV)
Water Consumption Fee Disclosure Appeal
The court implicitly affirmed the standard for access to official documents by stating that no overriding public or private interests stood against granting access.
B.2015.273 · sg (Art. 60 KV)
Tenant Leaseholder Information Disclosure in Public Land Flood Protection Cases
Cited as the constitutional basis for the principle of transparency guiding the decision on disclosure.
B.2013.241 · sg (Art. 60 Abs. 1 KV)
Appeal Regarding Non-Disclosure of School Board President Salary Before Budget Vote
The court found that the failure to disclose the salary constituted a breach of the principle of public access guaranteed by this article, justifying part of the appeal's success.
B.2013.241 · sg (Art. 60 Abs. 1 KV)
Appeal Regarding Municipal Budget Approval Due to Non-Disclosure of School Board President's Salary
The court partially allowed the appeal because the non-disclosure of the President's salary violated the principle of public access to information enshrined in this article, given the context of the budget vote.
B.2012.231 · sg (Art. 60 Abs. 1 KV)
Student v. University Regarding Retroactive Examination Accommodations
The court found no violation of the publicity principle in the dispositive section's reasoning, which supported the dismissal of the appeal.
B.2012.231 · sg (Art. 60 Abs. 1 KV)
Student v. University: Retroactive Disability Accommodations for Exams
Cited in the reasoning concerning the violation of the principle of public access to information, which was ultimately not found to be violated by the final order.
B.2012.231 · sg (Art. 60 Abs. 1 KV)
Student v. University: Retroactive Disability Accommodations for Exams
Cited in the reasoning regarding the principle of public access, which was confirmed as not violated in Order 1.
B.2012.29 · sg (Art. 60 Abs. 1 KV)
Association Appeal Dismissed for Police Officer Disciplinary Outcome Disclosure
The court considered the appellant's argument based on this article regarding the duty to inform about administrative activity.
B.2012.29 · sg (Art. 60 Abs. 1 KV)
Police Officer Disciplinary Proceedings Disclosure Appeal Dismissal
Cited in the reasoning (E. 4.2) as a constitutional basis for the principle of transparency, though ultimately rejected as the main ground for granting the appeal.
II.2.2011.5 · sg (Art. 60 Abs. 2 KV)
Property Owner's Right to Location Class Rating Criteria vs. Third-Party Valuation Secrecy
This constitutional provision establishing the principle of administrative publicity was examined, but ultimately deemed insufficient to override the tax secrecy concerning third-party calculation data.
II.2.2011.5 · sg (Art. 60 Abs. 2 KV (sGS 111.1))
Property Valuation Disclosure Rights Versus Tax Secrecy
Although the appeal regarding the location class criteria was deemed moot due to prior disclosure, the court's discussion centered on the right to information derived from this article, which was cited in the introductory summary.