THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION APPEAL RE MR MARK WALKER

The panel accepts that the electronic e-mail received from your office from Mr Mark Walker on 10 December 2009, is an expression of dissatisfaction and constitutes an appeal.

Record Keeping

The appeals panel sat at 0900 on 10 December 2009, to consider your appeal and had access to the relevant documentation from your initial request to date, in order that your appeal could be fully considered in line with appeal panel remit.

Structure of Review

The review panel consists of the following members:-

Chair: Chief Superintendent Robert Varey, Head of Professional Standards Department

Member: Dr Theresa Searl, Force Solicitor

Member: Nicola Hardy, Records Manager, Professional Standards Department

The review panel considered all material available in manual format.(including copies of electronically communicated documents)

Review of Procedure

The panel were satisfied that all relevant timescales were adhered to, and you, as the applicant, were kept duly informed.

The panel also notes that you were provided with specific material although not at a level to meet your request

The panel concludes that the procedures adopted by the decision-maker was in line with the principles of the Freedom of Information Act.

Review of Information identified for Response

The panel found that the information available to the decision-maker was sourced correctly, although the question in point is whether their decision not to release the specific level of material to you was correct.

Review Original Decision

The panel's decision making was based on a presumption of disclosure of the data requested.

Turning to the decision itself:

In respect your specific queries the panel were of the opinion that the majority of the information was in the public domain and we will clarify that as follows:

1: South Yorkshire Police has processed data relating to the leaked BNP membership list

2: The details contained on the list were checked against records held by South Yorkshire Police. In doing so consideration was given to Schedule 2 and 3 of the Data Protection Act.

3: Details from the list were used for the purpose of an assessment of risk to persons named on the list and reported to be living within South Yorkshire Police area. This was considered in accordance with Paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 and Paragraph 3 of Schedule 3.

3a. The above processing for both purposes was considered to be in accordance with Paragraph 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Schedule 1 to the Data Protection (Processing of sensitive personal data) Order 2000.

4: The decision was made at Senior Command Level within South Yorkshire Police.

5: The grounds for the decision are outlined at 2, 3 and 3a above.

6: There were no minutes of the meeting held which came to the decision.

7: The decision has been made in accordance with the above regulations and legislation.

Formulate Review Decision and Document

The process adopted in this review meets the requirements of an appeal under this Act and in terms of procedure the panel have sought to provide a proportionate response that gives details of its rationale and decision making.

It is the considered opinion of the panel that this appeal is rejected

20090557

1

1