Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing regarding your attempts to intimidate people at the
climate camp (and discourage others from attending) by demanding
personal information from them with menaces.

It is widely reported that you are demanding people's names. There
is no legal provision for doing so under the various bits of
outrageous "stop and search" legislation. My first question is,
what legislation do you think allows this gathering of data?

My second question is, please list precisely any other bits of
information you are trying to force out of people who are simply
going about their business and what the legal "justification" for
each additional piece of information is?

My third question is, what is your policy if people refuse to
accede to your Stasi style demands? Is the film at
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kol08/articl...
typical of your response to those who don't like your Stasi
approach? Are you proud of these actions? Will you tell your
children how "brave" you were attacking these fine upstanding
citizens and attempting to prevent them discussing the most
pressing problem we face today?

My fourth question is, what are you doing with this data? Note that
generic waffle answers will be deemed to be a refusal to answer.

My fifth question is, is this information being stored on a
database? If so for what reason? Note that generic waffle answers
will be deemed to be a refusal to answer.

My sixth question is, for how long is the data stored (in any form,
paper or electronic)?

My last question is, how is the data destroyed (again in any form)?

Seven simple questions. If you have nothing to hide then you will
have no trouble answering these questions rapidly.

Please note that "replies" which involve attachments in proprietary
file formats are not acceptable. A reply which is not in plain text
format will be deemed to be a refusal to answer.

Yours faithfully,

David Hansen

Dear Mr Hansen,

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST

Thank you for your request received by Kent Police on 7th August
2008andI note you seek access, in summary, to the following
information:

· Kent Police actions at Climate Camp.

Your interest in Kent Police is appreciated and pending a specific
response to your request, I enclose a sheet, which summarises your
rights. Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter,
please write or contact me on telephone number 01622 654429 quoting the
reference number above.

Yours sincerely,
Lorraine Watson
FOI Administrator

Enc.
Your Rights – A Summary

show quoted sections

11:28 >>>
Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing regarding your attempts to intimidate people at the
climate camp (and discourage others from attending) by demanding
personal information from them with menaces.

It is widely reported that you are demanding people's names.
There
is no legal provision for doing so under the various bits of
outrageous "stop and search" legislation. My first question is,
what legislation do you think allows this gathering of data?

My second question is, please list precisely any other bits of
information you are trying to force out of people who are simply
going about their business and what the legal "justification" for
each additional piece of information is?

My third question is, what is your policy if people refuse to
accede to your Stasi style demands? Is the film at

Freedom of Information Team
Data Protection Unit
Kent Police
Force HQ
Sutton Road
Maidstone
Kent ME15 9BZ

E-mail: [Kent Police request email]
Tel: +44 (0)1622 654429/654413
Fax: +44 (0)1622 654437
Internal: 19-4429/4413
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kol08/articl...

typical of your response to those who don't like your Stasi
approach? Are you proud of these actions? Will you tell your
children how "brave" you were attacking these fine upstanding
citizens and attempting to prevent them discussing the most
pressing problem we face today?

My fourth question is, what are you doing with this data? Note
that
generic waffle answers will be deemed to be a refusal to answer.

My fifth question is, is this information being stored on a
database? If so for what reason? Note that generic waffle answers
will be deemed to be a refusal to answer.

My sixth question is, for how long is the data stored (in any
form,
paper or electronic)?

My last question is, how is the data destroyed (again in any
form)?

Seven simple questions. If you have nothing to hide then you will
have no trouble answering these questions rapidly.

Please note that "replies" which involve attachments in
proprietary
file formats are not acceptable. A reply which is not in plain
text
format will be deemed to be a refusal to answer.

Yours faithfully,

David Hansen

show quoted sections

Dear Lorraine,

Given the extensive lawbreaking by Kent Police at the Climate Camp
it comes as no surprise to me that Kent Police are also incapable
of obeying another law. Your response is now illegally late.

I refer you to
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts2000/ukp...

"Subject to subsections (2) and (3), a public authority must comply
with section 1(1) promptly and in any event not later than the
twentieth working day following the date of receipt."

Yours sincerely,

David Hansen

Dear Mr Hansen,

I am in receipt of your e-mail below, which has been passed to me by
our freedom of Information team. I apologise that we have been unable
to respond to your two requests within the statutory time limit of 20
working days. I can assure you that efforts are being made to provide
you with a response as soon as possible.

Regards,
Nigel Amos
FOI Advisor/ Lead Auditor
Information Compliance Unit
Professional Standards
FHQ
01622 654430

show quoted sections

Freedom of Information Team
Data Protection Unit
Kent Police
Force HQ
Sutton Road
Maidstone
Kent ME15 9BZ

E-mail: [Kent Police request email]
Tel: +44 (0)1622 654429/654413
Fax: +44 (0)1622 654437
Internal: 19-4429/4413

show quoted sections

12:01 >>>
Dear Lorraine,

Given the extensive lawbreaking by Kent Police at the Climate
Camp
it comes as no surprise to me that Kent Police are also incapable
of obeying another law. Your response is now illegally late.

I refer you to

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts2000/ukp...

"Subject to subsections (2) and (3), a public authority must
comply
with section 1(1) promptly and in any event not later than the
twentieth working day following the date of receipt."

Yours sincerely,

David Hansen

show quoted sections

Dear Nigel,

It is now a week and a half since my last message and your holding
reply. However, your criminal (in)activities continue. No-doubt,
like any other gang of criminals, Kent Police believe that the law
does not apply to them.

You claimed that this information would be provided, "as soon as
possible". What is your definition of this term?

Yours sincerely,

David Hansen

Mr Hansen,

A response to your questions is complete and has been submitted to a senior officer for approval. I would expect that you will receive it within the next seven days.

Regards,
Nigel Amos
FOI Advisor/ Lead Auditor
Information Compliance Unit
Professional Standards
FHQ
01622 654430

show quoted sections

Dear Nigel,

It is now a week and a half since my last message and your holding
reply. However, your criminal (in)activities continue. No-doubt,
like any other gang of criminals, Kent Police believe that the law
does not apply to them.

You claimed that this information would be provided, "as soon as
possible". What is your definition of this term?

Yours sincerely,

David Hansen

show quoted sections

Dear Nigel,

In response to this FOI enquiry you posted a response in
<http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/th...>

In order not to conflate the two I have reproduced the whole your
response regarding this enquiry here, the right place for a reply
on this subject. I will shortly be making a few more enquiries in
response to your response.

Begin blockquote

Your second e-mail, our reference 6159-2008, asks the following,
which I will refer to as question 2:

2) a) It is widely reported that you are demanding people's names.
There is no legal provision for doing so under the various bits of
outrageous "stop and search" legislation. My first question is,
what legislation do you think allows this gathering of data?

b) My second question is, please list precisely any other bits of
information you are trying to force out of people who are simply
going about their business and what the legal "justification" for
each additional piece of information is?

c) My third question is, what is your policy if people refuse to
accede to your Stasi style demands? Is the film at
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kol08/articl... typical of your
response to those who don't like your Stasi approach? Are you proud
of these actions? Will you tell your children how "brave" you were
attacking these fine upstanding citizens and attempting to prevent
them discussing the most pressing problem we face today?

Again, questions 2 a), b) and c) ask for comment rather than
specific information, and so once again I must refer you to our
website, and to earlier paragraphs in this letter. However, I will
include here that in the course of their duties officers are
entitled to speak to any member of the public, and in doing so may
ask for a person’s name and other information that may account for
their movements. That person does have the right not to provide
this information, although this may, in some circumstances, provide
grounds to the officer for further enquiries, such as a search
under the provisions of section 1 of the Police and Criminal
Evidence Act (PACE) 1984. More information about PACE can be found
on the Home Office website at the link below.

http://police.homeoffice.gov.uk/operatio...

d) My fourth question is, what are you doing with this data? Note
that generic waffle answers will be deemed to be a refusal to
answer.

e) My fifth question is, is this information being stored on a
database? If so for what reason? Note that generic waffle answers
will be deemed to be a refusal to answer.

f) My sixth question is, for how long is the data stored (in any
form, paper or electronic)? My last question is, how is the data
destroyed (again in any form)?

g) My last question is, how is the data destroyed (again in any
form)?

Questions d-g do qualify as questions regarding information that
Kent Police may hold. However, you ask what is being done with data
in general and so I can only provide a general answer.

The Statutory Code of Practice for the Management of Police
Information (MoPI) 2005 provides a legal basis for the processing
of information by the police for policing purposes, which it
defines as follows:

(a) protecting life and property; (b) preserving order; (c)
preventing the commission of offences; (d) bringing offenders to
justice; (e) any duty or responsibility of the police arising from
common or statute law.

The definition of ‘processing’ in the Data Protection Act 1998
includes: obtaining, recording, using and disclosing.

Kent Police Policy M17 (Searching of persons, Vehicles and Road
Checks) sets out the force policy regarding searching members of
the public. This includes that all details of such interactions
with the public search must be recorded on PACE Section 1 form
1800. Section 14.1 of the policy states:

“Officers will submit completed forms to their supervisor who will
sign them as having been checked for accuracy, completion and that
the use of any power was appropriate.”

Incorrect forms are returned to the relevant officer for correction
and re-submission. The full policy can be found on our website.

Forms are then submitted to the Area Intelligence Unit, where the
content of the forms is then recorded upon the Kent Police Stop and
Search database. The information upon this database provides an
audit trail in terms of the justification for the search and is
then available to officers for general policing purposes and to the
Force for further and future intelligence analysis where
appropriate. Records held on the database are automatically weeded
after seven years.

With particular regard to the PACE S1 forms collected during
Operation Oasis, these have been separately collected for
assessment. Any form that does not meet the assessment criteria for
the Stop and Search Database in terms of the information’s
completeness, accuracy etc will not be recorded upon the system.

Thank you for your interest in Kent Police. A sheet, which
summarised your rights, was enclosed with the acknowledgement sent
to you and as suggested therein, should you have any further issues
concerning this matter, please contact me quoting the reference
number shown above.

End blockquote

Dear Nigel,

I have taken an extract of your response, those bits which can
quickly be replied to. That does not mean that I am finished with
the rest of your response.

In your response to my enquiry you deliberately refuse to answer
some questions, by falsely asserting that they "ask for comment
rather than specific information".

I request an internal review of your refusal to answer these
questions.

"2) a) It is widely reported that you are demanding people's names.
There is no legal provision for doing so under the various bits of
outrageous "stop and search" legislation. My first question is,
what legislation do you think allows this gathering of data?"

That is not asking for a comment, it is asking for specific
information. If this information is available on your web site then
please provide a link to *the relevant pages*.

"b) My second question is, please list precisely any other bits of
information you are trying to force out of people who are simply
going about their business and what the legal "justification" for
each additional piece of information is?"

That is not asking for a comment, it is asking for specific
information. If this information is available on your web site then
please provide a link to *the relevant pages*.

"c) My third question is, what is your policy if people refuse to
accede to your Stasi style demands? Is the film at
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kol08/articl... typical of your
response to those who don't like your Stasi approach? Are you proud
of these actions? Will you tell your children how "brave" you were
attacking these fine upstanding citizens and attempting to prevent
them discussing the most pressing problem we face today?"

That is not asking for a comment, it is asking for specific
information. If this information is available on your web site then
please provide a link to *the relevant pages*.

Note that after the first sentence it does ask for comment, which I
note you were unwilling to provide. People will draw their own
conclusions from that unwillingness. However, that does not alter
the fact that the first sentence asks for specific information. If
you do not have a policy, but instead individual officers make it
up as they go along, then please state this.

Yours sincerely,

David Hansen

Dear Mr Hansen,
Notice of Decision following an
Internal Review of Information Provided
Under the Provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Introduction
It is my understanding you sought information from Kent Police by way
of two email messages: both were received on 7 August 2008. In each
email you cited the Freedom of Information Act and the questions posed
were recorded as being made under the provisions of that Act. Mr Nigel
Amos of this Unit dealt with the matter and sent the Kent Police
response to you by email on 19 September 2008. You should know although
Mr Amos reports to me, for ethical reasons his decisions are made with
autonomous authority on behalf of Kent Police. I took no part in his
decision-making process.
You in turn responded to Mr Amos’s email later the same day seeking an
internal review of his, “refusal to answer”, certain questions. I have
reviewed the matter afresh as well as examining Mr Amos’s response to
you. I have examined all of the questions posed in your two email
messages. They were connected with a Climate Camp held in August this
year.
They are:It is widely reported that you are demanding people's names.
There is no legal provision for doing so under the various bits of
outrageous "stop and search" legislation. …[W]hat legislation do you
think allows this gathering of data?

[P]lease list precisely any other bits of information you are trying
to force out of people who are simply going about their business…

[A]nd what the legal "justification" for each additional piece of
information is?

[W]hat is your policy if people refuse to accede to your Stasi style
demands?

Is the film at[a web address was provided here] typical of your
response to those who don't like your Stasi approach?

Are you proud of these actions?

Will you tell your children how "brave" you were attacking these fine
upstanding citizens and attempting to prevent them discussing the most
pressing problem we face today?

[W]hat are you doing with this data?

[I]s this information being stored on a database?

If so for what reason?

[F]or how long is the data stored?

[H]ow is the data destroyed?

Please provide a list of all items stolen by yourselves from people at
the climate camp.

Please indicate what "crime" these "weapons" were supposed to be used
for.

A Brief Review of the Questions
Question 1 above seeks a view on the legislative foundation for the
course of action specified rather than information held.

Question 2 seeks an answer to non-recorded information. ie every
question posed by officers to every person spoken to in the course of
the climate camp. This is not information held.

Question 3 above seeks a view on the legislative foundation for the
course of action specified rather than information held.

Question 4 above seeks policy information. There is no policy that
covers Stasi-style demands. This is not information held.

Question 5 seeks a view on the content of a film. This is not
information held.

Question 6 seeks a statement about someone’s (not specified)
self-esteem. This is not information held.

Question 7 seeks a statement about someone’s (not specified) private
conversation with his or her children. This is not information held.

Questions 8 to 12 seek information about the processing of information.
Having examined Mr Amos’s response I note he has provided the
information sought.

Question 13 seeks information held in disparate records. I have
examined Mr Amos’s response in which he reports to comply with the
request would cause expense in excess of the appropriate
limit.Considerations
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 provides a general right of access
to information held by public authorities. I have some difficulty
reconciling all of the questions with the right provided by the Act.
Insofar as the requests posed questions that require viewpoints or
statements about personal feelings rather than informat
ion held by Kent
Police. Nevertheless there are aspects that quite clearly do seek
information held and these should have received a response.
The Act also requires appropriate information or a statement that
information is not held to be provided to requesters within 20 working
days unless there are grounds specified in the Act not to do so.Kent
Police’s Decision and Response
The response was made on 19 September 2008 and contained information to
answer some of the questions posed that could not be considered to
request information held by Kent Police. It also sought to answer
questions that I have numbered 8 to 12 above by providing information
held. However I note your question (number 12 above) might have been
also answered by signposting Kent Police Policy D17 (Secure Erasure of
Force Data Storage Media). The policy is available on the Kent Police
website
(http://www.kent.police.uk/About%20Kent%2...).
The response also dealt with the matter of property seized by police. It
records the grounds for non-disclosure of the information as being the
cost of doing so exceeding the appropriate limit.
The response was provided 30 working days after it was
received.Decision
The Kent Police response did provide information or a reason not to do
so where the request was clearly for information it held within the
terms of the Act. However Kent Police did not properly respond to your
request within the required 20 working days or extend the period whilst
a decision was made on public interest grounds. However there are no
grounds to overturn the decision conveyed by Mr Amos on 19 September
2008.Other Matters
If you wish to pursue your request further you are entitled to apply to
the Information Commissioner’s Office for a decision. The contact
details are:
Website: http://www.ico.gov.uk,
By telephone: 08456 30 60 60 or 01625 54 57 45,
By facsimile:01625 524510,
By post: The Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water
Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.
Yours sincerely,
Michael Doherty
Head of Information Compliance Unit
Kent Police
Tel: +44 (0)1622 652066
Internal: 19 2066
Fax: +44 (0)1622 654437
E-mail: [email address]
Postal: Information Compliance Unit, Kent Police HQ, Sutton Road,
Maidstone, ME15 9BZ.