Incomplete Response & Freedom of Information

finisklin

Hi folks,

wondering if someone can help me on this....if you submit a freedom of information request to a public body and they respond in due course with the requested information. However, the information they provided was incomplete e.g. they only released 4 documents out of say 10 that they have in their possession.

You are none the wiser, the Freedom of Information Act has been complied with as they have responded and provided what you think has been the 100% information requested and the information commissoner (if involved) cannot prove otherwise.

This is a massive weakness of the FoI legislation as there are no penalties for circumventing it in this fashion. Of course, you have to be able to prove/show the information that they haven't provided.

This has to be a problem in major planning issues and infrastructural projects etc. Though it is applicable across all public bodies, so I am sure it is rife and unfair to many requesters.

If anyone has any experience of this either inside or outside the public sector I would be interested in your views.....

Victor

There was actually a case like this recently. Someone applied for his garda file and was only given what was on PULSE - but not his pre-PULSE file.

You might have a look at the data protection commissioners website.

finisklin

Thanks Victor....checked that out....however I am referring to cases where the request for information isn't personal. The information may be about information in the public sector such as pay and expenses of TDs, for example.

sh_o

finisklin wrote: »

Hi folks,

wondering if someone can help me on this....if you submit a freedom of information request to a public body and they respond in due course with the requested information. However, the information they provided was incomplete e.g. they only released 4 documents out of say 10 that they have in their possession.

You are none the wiser, the Freedom of Information Act has been complied with as they have responded and provided what you think has been the 100% information requested and the information commissoner (if involved) cannot prove otherwise.

This is a massive weakness of the FoI legislation as there are no penalties for circumventing it in this fashion. Of course, you have to be able to prove/show the information that they haven't provided.

This has to be a problem in major planning issues and infrastructural projects etc. Though it is applicable across all public bodies, so I am sure it is rife and unfair to many requesters.

If anyone has any experience of this either inside or outside the public sector I would be interested in your views.....

Under the FOI acts, they will normally set out what documentation they are giving you and also the reason for refusal. If you disagree with their reason for refusal, you can apply for an internal review and then potentially to the information commissioner. Did you apply for an internal review under the acts of their decision to refuse to grant access to the records?

The legislation, in my opinion, is very pro release of the records. But it is sometimes difficult for those who are new to the process as it is quite technical in nature.

Our man in Havana

I take you know they have more than they released and they are saying here is everything so there is no refusal as such.

finisklin

Bond-007I take you know they have more than they released and they are saying here is everything so there is no refusal as such.

Yeah...that's exactly it....if they release it, it may embarrass them! By releasing portions of it and not refusing the request per se they are fuilfilling their obligations and hoping I go away......I can substantiate the fact that they more information that hasn't been released!

finisklin

sh_o wrote: »

Under the FOI acts, they will normally set out what documentation they are giving you and also the reason for refusal. If you disagree with their reason for refusal, you can apply for an internal review and then potentially to the information commissioner. Did you apply for an internal review under the acts of their decision to refuse to grant access to the records?

The legislation, in my opinion, is very pro release of the records. But it is sometimes difficult for those who are new to the process as it is quite technical in nature.

Its not in their interest and I have fulfilled the request and appeals etc correctly......

Our man in Havana

Complain to the information commissioner then.

sh_o

finisklin wrote: »

Yeah...that's exactly it....if they release it, it may embarrass them! By releasing portions of it and not refusing the request per se they are fuilfilling their obligations and hoping I go away......I can substantiate the fact that they more information that hasn't been released!

In their letter - did they state they were exempting certain information or not? Did they make a partial grant or a full grant and excluded information that you know exists?
Did the internal review / appeal also come back with the same result?

There is (unfortunatly for the public body) no "this could be embarrassing exemption"

take a look here:
http://www.oic.gov.ie/en/ReviewbytheCommissioner/HowtoApplyforaReviewbytheCommissioner/
Can take a long time though depending on how the request is framed etc.

finisklin

Bond-007 wrote: »

Complain to the information commissioner then.

I did....its not their job to search for information in government departments....they are limited to what the Freedom of Information Acts 1996 and 2003 allow.

finisklin

sh_o wrote: »

In their letter - did they state they were exempting certain information or not? Did they make a partial grant or a full grant and excluded information that you know exists?
Did the internal review / appeal also come back with the same result?

There is (unfortunatly for the public body) no "this could be embarrassing exemption"

take a look here:
http://www.oic.gov.ie/en/ReviewbytheCommissioner/HowtoApplyforaReviewbytheCommissioner/
Can take a long time though depending on how the request is framed etc.

They made a full decision and I can substantiate that there is more information, which I have confirmed to the information commissioner.

It is a big weakness of the FoI act that there are no penalties or recourse should this situation arise! In effect, it protects the public bodies.....

Our man in Havana

That don't sound right at all.

So if a council or other public body says we don't have that information there is no recourse to the information commissioner?

finisklin

It is not in their interest to play by the rules and it is difficult for the information commissioner to go and extract the info. Clever public servants bending the rules......

Victor

If you know actual specifics, try quoting those specifics in a letter stating that the release is incomplete.

finisklin

Victor wrote: »

If you know actual specifics, try quoting those specifics in a letter stating that the release is incomplete.

I have brougth my concerns to the information commissioner and I am going to await his findings. By not substantiating my claim of the dept. having more documents at this point, it shouldn't preempt their work, and put the onus on them to investigate fully.