Dear Sir / Madam

I am writing in relation to a FOI request made to the Identity &
Passport Service.

Ref: FOICR 9526/08

All correspondence in relation to the above can be followed at
<<http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/pa...>>

Their response indicated that internal reviews were carried out by
the Home Office, so I request that you carry out an internal review
for the above request, on the basis that the FOI exemptions they
have claimed have not been correctly applied in accordance with:

* the Secretary of State’s Code of Practice,

* guidance provide by the Information Commissioner,

* guidance provide by the DCA.

I've outlined below the areas I believe should have been
considered.

____1. Provision of electronic version of Post Office photo
templates____

Section 43(2) exemption was claimed on what seems to be both the
current version of the template and a planned future version
(currently undergoing usability testing). I will cover each item in
turn as I believe they are separate pieces of information.

I'd like to remind you that to claim an exemption under 43(2), both
a prejudice test and a public interest test must be applied.

__A) Current version of the template

* No grounds were given for opposition for release of the current
version of the template in the "against" public interest test - the
only opposition was that the current version "will change shortly".

* This is not a valid reason for withholding the information under
the FOIA, and it should be disclosed.

* No prejudice test was carried out for this exemption.

* An additional reason in favour of disclosure of the current
template is due to the Post Office's current monopoly position in
providing a passport photo check service.

From the ICO's guidance:
<<http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/l...>>
(p6)

"The level of competition within an industry will effect whether
the release of information will harm someone’s commercial
interests. Where a company enjoys a monopoly over the provision of
the goods or services in question it is less likely that releasing
the information will have a prejudicial impact on that company"

Relating to the prejudice test that should have been applied to
this exemption, the balance should be in favour of disclosure as
release of the current template is not likely to prejudice I&PS'
relationship with the Post Office.

__B) New version of the template

* In order to exempt under Section 43(2), "release of the
information is likely to prejudice the commercial interests of any
person."

From the DCA's guidance:
<<http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/guidance/exgui...>>
"3.1 In order to decide whether or not disclosure could prejudice
commercial interests it is necessary to identify: - the interests
themselves and how disclosure might prejudice them, and - whose
interests they are"

* The interests have not been defined

* The identity/ies of whose interests they belong to has not been
defined

From the ICO's guidance:
<<http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/l...>>
(Section G.a, p10) "In order to determine whether the disclosure of
information would prejudice a commercial interest, a public
authority should, in accordance with the Secretary of State’s Code
of Practice, consult with the parties likely to be affected by any
disclosure."

* If your reply there was no mention of consultation with third
parties to allow publication of the information.

* In addition there was no mention of the words "public interest
test" as required in the Code of Conduct

* There is no overall assessment of balance of public interest.

____2. Provision of technical specifications for photo measurements
____

To clarify you appear to be claiming under exemptions 31.1.a the
prevention or detection of crime, and 31.1.e the operation of the
immigration controls.

I'd again like to remind you that to claim an exemption under
31(1), first a prejudice test and then a public interest test must
be applied.

From my previous email to yourselves, the information I am asking
for is for the technical specification for your implementation of a
publically available, international ICAO Standard for how the I&PS
measures scanned photographs during the passport application
process in order to build up a biometric.

Your arguments in favour of withholding the information:

You say: "On the other hand, disclosure of any one of the security
features of passports would, if the information fell into the wrong
hands, provide criminals with guidance on the features they need to
defeat in order to commit identity fraud or aid illegal
immigration. This would result in putting the public in greater
danger of becoming victims of identity crime."

* The photo scanning process is not a "security feature" as it is
the mathematical conversion of a facial biometric (scanned-in
photo) into a encoded representation of this, based on a public
ICAO Standard.

* I have not asked for details of any "security features", and
these should be redacted in any information you provide.

You say: "We have carefully considered the balance of the public
interest test and concluded that, in this case it is in favour of
non-disclosure. The information should be restricted to those who
need to check passports as part of their duties in investigating
crime or operating the immigration controls"

* I have not asked for information on checking of passports in
investigation of crime

* I have not asked for information on methods of operating the
immigration controls.

* These points are therefore not relevant for your reasons for
witholding the information.

* An additional reason in favour of disclosure is that publication
of your technical implementation will allow its independent
scrutiny to ensure it did in fact meet the ICAO Standard.

____Summary____

From the ICO:
http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/l...
(p2)

"The ICO has emphasised the importance of clear and fully explained
refusal notices. A poor notice that does not fully explain an
authority’s decision may indicate that a request has not been dealt
with seriously"

I believe that my requests have been incorrectly turned down based
on incorrect interpretation of the legislation and that official
Code of Conduct, guidance and best practices have not been
followed.

I therefore formally request that you review the decision to
withhold the information and disclose the requested documents
without further delay.

I would also be very grateful if you could acknowledge your receipt
of this request.

Yours faithfully

Alex Skene

Dear Mr Skene,

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your request for an internal
review of a Freedom of Information request you made about the details of
passport photographs received here on the 23 June 2008. Our unit has
been asked to carry out that review and can confirm that we were not
involved with the handling of your initial request.

We have a 40 working day target to reply to requests for an internal
review and I hope to reply to you no later than 18 August 2008.

Yours sincerely,

Gareth Wyn Hazzelby | Information Access Performance Supervisor |
Information Rights Team

Information Management Service | Shared Services Directorate | 4th Floor
| Seacole Building | 2 Marsham Street | SW1P 4DF

show quoted sections

Dear Alex Skeene,

Please find attached an update to your Internal Review request.

Thanks
Oliver Lendrum

show quoted sections