USR - Reference number I-755/2025-8

During the legal proceedings against the AZOP decision, he further claimed that the authority had incorrectly and incompletely established the facts, had misapplied substantive law, and had violated procedural rules. He emphasized that the published personal data were not related to transparency in public administration, that he was neither a public figure nor a political actor, and that any potential public interest ceased at the moment he left his position on March 31, 2023. He invoked his right to erasure, as stipulated in [[Article 17 of the GDPR]], and requested the removal of the content, the annulment of the AZOP decision, or, alternatively, a reopening of the proceedings. During the legal proceedings against the AZOP decision, he further claimed that the authority had incorrectly and incompletely established the facts, had misapplied substantive law, and had violated procedural rules. He emphasized that the published personal data were not related to transparency in public administration, that he was neither a public figure nor a political actor, and...

This content has been automatically translated using machine translation. The original version is available in the source language.

This content was automatically translated using machine translation. The original version is available in the source language.