|
|
Data Access and Compliance Unit Postal Point 6.25 Floor 6 102 Petty France London SW1H 9AJ T 020 3334 5249 F 020 3334 2245 E [email address] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. John [FOI #13283 email]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 August 2009
|
|
Ref: 60475 |
Dear Mr John,
Internal Review - Freedom of Information request
Thank you for your Internal Review request dated 13 July 2009. I conduct Internal Reviews for the Ministry of Justice and your case has been passed to me for investigation. The purpose of the Internal Review is to look at the basis of the original decision and investigate how the case was handled.
In the response you received from the Ministry of Justice you were informed that the information you requested is held by the Ministry of Justice, however, there were two exemptions which applied to this information which prevented its disclosure. These exemptions were section 27, international relations, and section 35, the formulation of government policy.
The Ministry of Justice conducted a public interest test into the usage of these exemptions and concluded that the balance lay in favour of withholding the information.
I have re-assessed your case and I have concluded that the original decision you received was correct. I have reached this conclusion through conducting two thorough public interest tests. In the first instance, two public interest tests should have been applied to the information you requested, reflecting the use of two separate qualified exemptions. I am sorry that you did not see a clear analysis of both exemptions in your first response. I have included a copy of the public interest tests I conducted in respect of section 27 and section 35. I hope this clarifies what points have been considered in relation to your request and why I have decided to withhold the information.
Section 27 Public Interest Test
Arguments against disclosure:
Future communications and conduct with other governments may be affected due to the loss of confidence that is experienced following the disclosure of confidential information.
Disclosure would undermine international obligations and agreements that the UK government had with other organisations.
Arguments for disclosure:
Disclosing the information would increase openness and transparency in the way in which the government interacts with external organisations.
Disclosure would increase the public's knowledge of the way in which the government works and operates, instilling greater confidence in the government.
Section 35 Public Interest Test
Arguments in favour of disclosure:
greater transparency makes the government more accountable to the electorate and therefore increases trust in the way in which government works
disclosure allows the public to assess the quality of advice being given to ministers and to learn about the subsequent decision making
Arguments against disclosure:
good government depends on good decision making and this needs to be based on the best advice available and a full consideration of all the options without fear of premature disclosure
ministers and officials also need to be able to conduct rigorous and candid risk assessments of their policies and programmes including considerations of the pros and cons without there being premature disclosure which might close off better options.
In light of the above points, I have judged that there are stronger arguments against public disclosure. I am sorry that on this occasion I have been unable to present you with the information that you asked for and I hope I have provided you with an adequate explanation of why this has not been.
If you are not satisfied with my findings in this Internal Review you have a right to ask the Information Commissioner to review my decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at the following address:
The Information Commissioner's Office
Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Yours Sincerely,
Hannah Wright
Data Access & Compliance Unit
Page 1