10.07.2010
For years, the East Jerusalem branch of the National Insurance Institute charged fees for handling information requests by HaMoked, in breach of the Freedom of Information Law which stipulates that no fee shall be charged for a person’s request for information about himself
For many years, ever since it began handling applications by East Jerusalem residents vis-à-vis various officials at the Ministry of Interior and the National Insurance Institute (NII), HaMoked was required by to pay a fee of ILS 30 each time it sought information from an NII personal file (investigation materials, income support records, protocols of medical committee hearings, etc.).
In late 2009, HaMoked was informed that as of January 2010, the fee would rise to ILS 86. The NII's response to HaMoked's enquiry on the matter, revealed that the fee had been set on the basis of a decision of the Deputy Director General for Benefits relating to the supply of information to "data research companies acting for insurance companies" and that the fee was matched to the fee set under to the Freedom of Information Act.
In a letter to the Deputy Director General for Benefits, seeking clarification on the fee charge fee and its high rate, it was stated that "HaMoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual is a human rights organization, a nonprofit organization, which appeals to the NII as an authorized representative of East Jerusalem residents, acting for the purpose of full realization of their rights vis-à-vis the NII and the Ministry of Interior" and that the Freedom of Information Law, section 18(D) clearly stipulates that "no fee shall be charged for a person’s request for information about himself". In accordance with this provision, even the NII has stipulated and published on its website that "information requested by a person concerning himself and his rights is exempt from a request fee as well as a handling fee for 6 hours of work".
On June 28, 2010, the NII's response arrived, stating that "the Jerusalem office has misinterpreted the instruction". However, it continued to state that HaMoked was not entitled to apply in the name of insured persons and that a signed power of attorney must be enclosed in order to receive information on behalf of an insured person.
