An FOI request to Sussex Police for all communications with Brighton Council relating to the banning of SchMovies On The Verge premiere screening on 17 March 2008, has produced a redacted photocopy of a tiny entry in a police notebook .
The response letter below explains that although their maybe far more interesting documents out there, suusex police are not in a position to confirm or deny their existence and have refused to do either.
The identity of the officer who called the Council to complaint about the film has been concealed.
The response letter below explains that although their maybe far more interesting documents out there, suusex police are not in a position to confirm or deny their existence and have refused to do either.
The identity of the officer who called the Council to complaint about the film has been concealed.
Dear Mr X
I write in connection with your request for information which was received by Sussex Police on 18 March, and enclose a photocopy of an entry in an officer’s notebook recording a phone call made to Brighton and Hove Council on 17 March.
We are unable to confirm or deny whether we hold any other information related to your request. To provide a statement of the reasons why neither confirming nor denying is appropriate in this case would itself involve the disclosure of exempt information. Therefore under Section 17(4) of the Act no explanation will be given. To the extent that the following Sections of the Act apply we have assessed that the public interest in maintaining the exclusion of the duty to confirm or deny outweighs the public interest is disclosing whether or not we hold the information.
Section 31(3) (Law Enforcement);
Section 38(2) (Health and Safety);
Section 40(5) (Personal Information);
Section 41(2) (Information provided in confidence),
In accordance with the Act this letter acts as a Refusal Notice for any other information you have sought. Please note that this action cannot be taken as confirmation or denial that Sussex Police holds any other information you have asked for.
Yours sincerely
T Mahony
Freedom of Information Disclosure Officer
I write in connection with your request for information which was received by Sussex Police on 18 March, and enclose a photocopy of an entry in an officer’s notebook recording a phone call made to Brighton and Hove Council on 17 March.
We are unable to confirm or deny whether we hold any other information related to your request. To provide a statement of the reasons why neither confirming nor denying is appropriate in this case would itself involve the disclosure of exempt information. Therefore under Section 17(4) of the Act no explanation will be given. To the extent that the following Sections of the Act apply we have assessed that the public interest in maintaining the exclusion of the duty to confirm or deny outweighs the public interest is disclosing whether or not we hold the information.
Section 31(3) (Law Enforcement);
Section 38(2) (Health and Safety);
Section 40(5) (Personal Information);
Section 41(2) (Information provided in confidence),
In accordance with the Act this letter acts as a Refusal Notice for any other information you have sought. Please note that this action cannot be taken as confirmation or denial that Sussex Police holds any other information you have asked for.
Yours sincerely
T Mahony
Freedom of Information Disclosure Officer
Homepage:
Comments
Hide the following 4 comments
so thats an admission then
30.04.2008 17:32
How do you spell duplicity - S, U, S,S,E,X ,P,O,L,I,C,E
How do you spell medacity - S, U, S,S,E,X ,P,O,L,I,C,E
see you on the 4th June on the level
TLC
Next thing
30.04.2008 20:40
though I'm sure you guys have sussed this out already - but do it for all of us - you know Zero Tolerance - well if the cops get away with cover-ups at this level then they'll think they can get away with murder!! It's very important to use the democratic channels if only to show that they don't work, they'll still show up on statistics so others can see that the system works or not - then publicise the results widely - keep up the pressure!
and well done on the campaign so far. VERY INSPIRING!
Goforem
thanks goforem
30.04.2008 22:06
First there is an internal review process where Sussex Police have to investigate themselves (heh) and check they have fulfilled their obligations under the Freedom of Info act, then, once they have found nothing wrong with anything they have ever done ever, (this takes about 20 working days) there is the next level of appeal to the Information Commissioner which can take years, so basically it all gets buried eventually in the wonderful democratic channels open to us all.
For those wishing to experience for themselves the complete sham of the FOI act, there is nothing stopping them making requests to their own public authorities, council, police for communications regarding the censorship of On The Verge in their town. Best do it quickly so they can't say the info is lost or deleted.
It costs nothing. All you have to do is send an email to the FOI officer of the public authority in question with your name and address. Ask for specific documents or records so they can't say its over the cost limit to collect all the info for you. They have to respond within 20 working days. Then you get a usually disappointing letter with nothing much in it that you don't know already. Then you can ask for the internal review and be disappointed again.
go for it..
x
FOI also sought from Herefordshire Council
01.05.2008 19:16
Alistair Mitchell
e-mail:
alistairmitchell@hotmail.com