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 1 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:

The appeal is rejected, the reasoning for that decision being that, having considered the request received, it is quite clearly you asked for and were supplied with details of South Yorkshire Police Policy in respect of Membership of Unacceptable Organisations and as such the request requires no further information to be supplied.

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

20090618

1

1