The Santiago Court of Appeals rejected the actions filed by Blanco y Negro SA and Azul Azul SA, concessionaires that manage Colo-Colo and the University of Chile, respectively, which sought to annul the decision of the Council for Transparency (CPLT), which ordered the General Treasury of the Republic to deliver tax information on soccer clubs, among other issues, details of the fines and debt forgiveness that the treasury would have granted the concessionaires.
The Corporations argued their appeal by indicating that the communication of information such as those requested via the Transparency Law would affect the economic and commercial rights of third parties.
From Blanco y Negro SA they specified that “as a legal entity, it is the holder of a right to a “good name”, “fame” or “reputation”, which could be commercially affected. Meanwhile, in the case of Azul Azul SA “advertising the status of debtor not only has an impact on the honor of the legal entity, but also on its commercial prestige, impacting the price of shares and consequent valuation in the stock market. “.
“The Obvious Public Interest”
The Council for Transparency maintained that the requested information is of “obvious public interest.” “It is a public and notorious fact, which allows social control over compliance with public charges by taxpayers,” they added.
“Here we are talking about the forgiveness of millionaire debts, by the State, to soccer teams. In courts, the criterion that we apply as the Board of Directors was ratified and that, in this issue, as important and massive in Chile as soccer is, it is not can simply argue that it is a business between private parties,” said the head of the CPLT, Francisco Leturia.
“We have said it in other instances, the role of the Council is to open information, to allow people to know if what the law establishes was actually complied with or not. If these tax benefits were delivered, how was it done, through instructions or other documents, and if what was said there was fulfilled,” stressed the representative of the CPLT
“If we are talking about forgiveness in fines or agreements that were signed with the State, there is consensus that we have to shed light on this business, if there are public funds involved,” he closed.
In the ruling of the Court of Appeals of Santiago, it was also established that the grounds for alleged reservation were inadmissible, not being enough to allege its existence, but rather to prove it.
