MOD Demi-Official Letter Template

From Andrew Tranham

Dear Mr Burman

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 – INTERNAL REVIEW

1. I am writing in response to your e-mail dated 25 October 2010 in which you asked for an internal review of the handling of your request for information about the Royal Army Chaplains’ Dress Regulations. I have now completed a full independent review of the handling of your request and the substance of the responses you received. The purpose of the internal review is to consider whether the requirements of the Act have been fulfilled. The scope of the review is defined by PartVI of the Code of Practice under Section 45 of the Act, which can be found at:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/docs/foi-section45-code-of-practice.pdf

Handling

2. In conducting my review of the handling of your request, I focussed on the following requirements of the Act:

a.  Section 1(1)(a) which, subject to certain exclusions, gives any person making a request for information to a public authority, the entitlement to be informed in writing by the public authority whether it holds information of the description specified in the request;

b.  Section 1(1)(b) which, subject to certain exemptions, creates an entitlement to receive the information held by the public authority;

c.  Section 10(1) which states that, subject to certain provisions allowing extensions of time, the public authority must comply with the requirements of Section 1(1) promptly, and in any event not later than the twentieth working day following the date of receipt;

d.  Section 22 which states that information is exempt information if it is intended for future publication..

3. Your initial request for information dated 18 May 2010 was as follows:

“I would like to request under the Freedom of Information Act a copy of the current full dress regulations pertaining specifically to the Royal Army Chaplains Department. Please include a list of issued or required items peculiar to the RAChD.

The information is required for personal and private research. I have undertaken an extensive search of both the MOD website and the public area of the ArmyNet for the regulations and cannot find it.”

Your request, which was received in the Ministry of Defence (MOD) on 5 October 2010, was answered by the Headquarters Land Forces Secretariat (LF Sec) on 25 October 2010. This was 14 working days after the receipt of your request and was well within the statutory timescale stated in Section 10(1) of the Act. You were not informed specifically that the requested information was held by the MOD but this was implicit in the reply which withheld the information engaging Section 22 of the Act.

Substance of the reply

4. LFSec’s letter of 25 October 2010 informed you that the information you had requested fell into the scope of the exemption at Section 22 of the Act (intended for future publication) because, as a result of the number of requests received in the MOD for the Army Dress Regulations, it had been decided to publish it through the Department’s publication scheme. LF Sec did not specify, however, which sub sections of Section 22 were engaged. Information can only be exempt from disclosure under Section 22 if the conditions set out in Section 22(1)(a)-(c) of the Act, as set out below, apply:

(a) the information is held by the public authority with a view to its publication, by the authority or any other person, at some future date (whether determined or not),

(b) the information was already held with a view to such publication at the time the request was made, and

(c ) it is reasonable in all the circumstances that the information should be withheld from disclosure until the date referred to in paragraph (a).

I find that the conditions at (a) and (b) above do apply to your request since there was a definite intention to publish the information through the publication scheme at the time your request was received - even though at that time the date of publication was not determined. However, I find that there remains no firm date for publication, and as it would appear to be some time off, I do not find it reasonable in all the circumstances that the information should be withheld until publication. In considering whether the condition at (c) is met, I have taken into account that the information that is held now is identical to that which will be published in the future and that there are no public interest arguments for withholding the information under Section 22. In view of this, I find that the exemption at Section 22 does not apply to the the information you have requested and should be provided to you. Please send me your postal address and I will arrange for a copy of The Royal Army Chaplains’ Department Dress Regulations – Nov 08 to be sent to you by return of post.

5. In your request for internal review I note that you asked for the name of the company that supplies the items issued. Since this information was not requested in your original request I have not addressed this new request during my review. However, should you wish to make a new FOI request for this information, please let me know, confirming the terms of your new request, and I will ensure that it is allocated to the relevant branch.

Conclusions

6. In conclusion I have found that:

§  Your request for information was handled promptly and well with the statutory timescale.

§  Section 22 of the Act is not engaged and therefore a copy of the requested information will be released to you upon receipt of your postal address.

7. I trust this has now clarified the position. However, if any aspect of this review is unclear, I should be happy to explain it. If you are dissatisfied with the review, you may make a complaint to the Information Commissioner under the provisions of Section 50 of the Act. Further details of the role and powers of the Commissioner can be found on his website at: www.ico.gov.uk. His address is:

Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

WILMSLOW

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Fax: 01625 524510

Yours sincerely

Signed

A Tranham