Dear Sir or Madam,

According to Section 46(3) of the Terrorism Act 2000, a police
officer of the appropriate rank who gives a Section 44
authorisation of stop and search powers within a specified area
must notify the Secretary of State as soon as reasonably
practicable.

The Secretary of State may confirm an authorisation or end it at an
earlier date than the police official originally declared.

Please can I be sent copies of:

* The current procedure for handling a Section 46(3) notification
when it is received by the Home Office from the police, including
details about what databases the information is entered into, how
it is archived, and at what point and manner the Secretary of State
herself is notified.

* The procedures that are used to monitor which areas are still
Section 44 authorised and for reminding officials when an
authorisation needs renewal.

* The template sample letters which the Secretary of State uses to
confirm the authorisation and vary its conditions.

* All current guidelines and sample letters which the Home Office
will have sent to police forces around the country to assist them
with their duty to comply with Sections 44 to 46 of the Act.

I do not believe it would take much longer to gather this material
than it would take to run through the procedures when dealing with
a real Section 44 authorisation. According to Section 46(6), the
time limit for a processing these authorisations is 48 hours.

Yours faithfully,

Julian Todd.

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing to note that my Freedom of Information request I made
on 5 September about the bureaucratic procedures for processing a
Section 44 Terrorism Act notification is now overdue.

I have not received any acknowledgement or request for an
extension, as I did for my last request.

Please let me know where this request stands.

Thank you,

Julian Todd

Reference : T21785/8

Thank you for your e-mail enquiry of 06/10/2008 12:10:50 PM

A reply is attached.

show quoted sections

Dear Sir or Madam,

Thanks for your reply. I sent two separate communications to the
Home Office on 5 September.

The first email related to my 10 July 2008 FOI request for the all
the authorizations made pursuant to Section 44 Terrorism Act. This
request was rejected under Section 12 of FOI Act because it would
exceed the cost limits, and I was advised to narrow my request for
information. I was also advised that if I was dissatisfied with the
response I needed to request an internal review within two months.

I wrote back that I reserved my right to make a complaint in light
of the response to my next FOI request. I did not mention that I
may be late if the Home Office was slow in its response.

Then, on the same day, (5 September) I drafted my next FOI request
(as promised), which was for details about the procedure for
processing a Section 44 authorization.

Depending on what I find out about this procedure, I will either
make a complaint about my original FOI request, or make a new one
designed so that to fit within the cost limit.

I am sorry for the confusion. Please find a copy of my request at
this link here:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/se...

Please advise if you would prefer me to email you a second copy of
my request.

Yours sincerely,

Julian Todd

Reference : T22277/8

Thank you for your e-mail enquiry of 13/10/2008 5:01:22 PM

An Interim reply is attached.

show quoted sections

[Subject only] 10394 - PIT letter

show quoted sections

Reference : T22277/8

Thank you for your e-mail enquiry of 13/10/2008 5:01:22 PM

A reply is attached.

show quoted sections

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please pass this request for an internal review to the Information
Rights Team of the Home Office (quoting reference 10394) of my FOI
request made on 5 September, which was replied to by J Fanshaw
today.

I received some of the information I requested (the guidance and
sample forms sent to the police for making Section 44 Terrorism Act
authorisations), but with regards to the internal Home Office
procedures for processing these requests as they come in, I have
been served with a Section 36(c) (prejudice of effective conduct of
public affairs) exemption.

As I stated in my correspondence, this FOI request is pursuant to
the response I received from my 10 July 2008 request for the list
of all Section 44 authorisations, which the Home Office must be
notified of under statutory obligations, which was turned down
because it would exceed the cost limit.

My clear intention is to find out from the bureaucratic procedure
the details and at what point the information requests are entered
into a computer database. (It is reasonable to assume this, since
if all stop-and-searches are recorded in a database, then the
authorisations will be posted there as well for cross-referencing
purposes.)

With knowledge of this database, I would be in a better position to
file a reasonable appeal against the cost exemption served against
my original request owing to the fact that the costs involved in
creating a dump from an electronic database are widely known to be
minimal.

I can think of no legitimate reason that disclosure of the
bureaucratic procedure within the Home Office for handling a
Section 44 authorisation and recording it in a database could be
prejudicial to public affairs, which is why I am following it up
with this complaint.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is
available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/se...

Yours sincerely,

Julian Todd

Dear Mr Todd,

Please find attached correspondence in relation to your request for an
internal review.

Yours sincerely,

John Bragaglia
Information Access Consultant

show quoted sections