training provided to judges by Stonewall, Gendered Intelligence and similar organisations

Naomi Cunningham made this Rhyddid Gwybodaeth request to Judicial College

Automatic anti-spam measures are in place for this older request. Please let us know if a further response is expected or if you are having trouble responding.

Gwrthodwyd y cais gan Judicial College.

Dear Judicial College,

This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).

Please provide any information that you hold as to any training provided to judges (including tribunal judges) in 2019 or 2020:

(a) by any of the following bodies:

Stonewall
Gendered Intelligence
GIRES (the Gender Identity Research and Education Society)
Mermaids
Global Butterflies
Trans Equality Legal Initiative
Press for Change
Galop

or (b) specifically relating to the rights or experiences of transgender participants (in any capacity) in legal proceedings, by any other body not referred to above.

In each case, please say:

1. When the training was provided.
2. How it was provided (i.e. in person, by webinar, etc.)
3. Who attended (please list, giving names and details of judicial office)
4. Whether a fee was paid for the training by or on behalf of the Judicial College, and if so how much.

Please also provide copies of:

5. Any associated handouts, notes, Powerpoint (or similar) presentations.
6. Any written contracts for the provision of the training.
7. Any directions or instructions issued by or on behalf of the Judicial College to the training body, setting out the nature of the training required and the matters that it should cover.

The Judicial College is the successor body to the Judicial Studies Board, specifically listed at FOIA schedule 1, and hence is clearly subject to FOIA. Further, there is no credible basis on which it can be suggested that information about the training of judges - the whole purpose of both bodies - is held by the Judicial College on behalf of some other person or body (e.g. "the judiciary") and is therefore outside the scope of FOIA.

Yours faithfully,

Naomi Cunningham

JCGovernance&Policy, Judicial College

1 Atodiad

Dear Ms Cunningham,

 

Please see attached the response to your recent request made under the
Freedom of Information Act.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

David Hall

Judicial College

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Judicial College,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Judicial College's handling of my FOI request 'training provided to judges by Stonewall, Gendered Intelligence and similar organisations'.

I explained in my initial request why I believed that the Judicial College was covered by FOIA. I said:

"The Judicial College is the successor body to the Judicial Studies Board, specifically listed at FOIA schedule 1, and hence is clearly subject to FOIA. Further, there is no credible basis on which it can be suggested that information about the training of judges - the whole purpose of both bodies - is held by the Judicial College on behalf of some other person or body (e.g. "the judiciary") and is therefore outside the scope of FOIA."

You have sent me what appears to be a boilerplate response, which does not deal with this.

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

Yours faithfully,

Naomi Cunningham

JCGovernance&Policy, Judicial College

1 Atodiad

Dear Ms Cunningham,

 

Please find attached a letter of response to your request for an internal
review of FOI 210116008.

 

Kind regards,

 

Grace Hodges

Governance, Policy and Director of Training Support Manager

Governance & Policy Team, Judicial College 
 

 

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Gadawodd Naomi Cunningham anodiad ()

I have complained to the ICO on 16 March 2021. I said:

I asked the Judicial College, successor body to the Judicial Studies Board, for details of training given to judges by any of a number of named external organisations. I have received a reply from the Ministry of Justice telling me that the information was held by the Judicial College on behalf of "another person." That other person is identified as "the judiciary (and in particular, the Lord Chief Justice)."

I do not believe that this can be right. The Judicial College is the successor body to the Judicial Studies Board, listed at schedule 1 to the FOI Act. Its purpose is described on the judiciary.uk website as "to enable all judicial office holders for whom the Lord Chief Justice (LCJ) and the Senior President of Tribunals (SPT) have statutory responsibility, to be trained by the same organisation." Training judges is the Judicial College's own responsibility: it is the function for which it exists, and the information it holds for that purpose is information that it holds for the purpose of performing its own function. Its inclusion on schedule 1 to the Act would be meaningless if it could properly be said that it does nothing except on behalf of the judiciary or the Lord Chief Justice.