This article examines how the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) interprets the right of access to information and the positive obligations derived from it. The difficulty of interpreting positive obligations in the right of access to information cases is concretised in Court case law: there are cases where the Court, either explicitly or implicitly, poses positive obligations in order to fulfil the right of access to information. [---] The point of this article is to demonstrate the challenges relating to positive obligations in protecting the right of access to information by analysing two fully opposite judgments by the Court, namely the Bubon and Österreichische Vereinigung.