Disclosure Team
Ministry of Justice
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ
Mr P Kernman
xxxx.xxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx.xx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
19 November 2019
Dear Mr Kernman
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request – 191027001
Thank you for your request dated 27 October in which you asked for the following
information from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ):
Dear Disclosure Team,
Further to my correspondence of 10 September regarding challenging
your view that my request did not fall under the Freedom of Information
Act 2000 (FOIA) regime.
I would argue that my request does fall under the FOIA and the JCIO's
initial focus needs to be on whether or not the public authority holds the
requested information. Section 84 defines the ‘information’ a public
authority can be asked to provide under the FOIA. It makes clear that it
means recorded information held in any form.
My request asked if the JCIO was 'aware about the tribunal discovering
that the Ministry of Justice had forged documents and if so did it take
this into account when investigating a complaint which was later
discovered to have involved similar criminal misconduct'.
The above effectively comprises two requests and both are valid
according to the definition in s.84. The second request although valid
arguably may be exempt information if it were held, however, the first
categorically would not.
The JCIO now holds recorded information in relation to the first request
in the form of an email I sent on 29 June 2019. The question should be
did the JCIO hold the requested information in any form before 29 June
and if it was the information should be disclosed. Whether or not the
information is held there is no basis to view that my request did not fall
under the FOIA regime.
Yours sincerely,
P Kernman
Your request has been handled under the FOIA.
With respect to your specific request - “did the JCIO hold the requested information in any
form before 29 June”, the MoJ does not hold any information in the scope of your request.
The FOIA does not oblige a public authority to create information to answer a request if the
requested information is not held. The duty is to only provide the recorded information held.
The JCIO is a statutory body which supports the Lord Chancellor and Lord Chief Justice in
their joint responsibility for judicial discipline. The JCIO’s statutory remit is to assess
complaints about the personal conduct of judicial office holders. The JCIO cannot look at
how a judge has managed a case or look at the judicial decisions made by a judicial office
holder, such issues must be addressed through the appeals process.
We cannot consider allegations made against parties to a hearing. Complaints about non-
judicial office holders are rejected at the outset.
The JCIO cannot accept direct complaints about tribunal judges. Such complaints must be
made to the relevant tribunal president for consideration, before the matter can be referred
to the JCIO.
Our remit and procedures are governed by statutory rules and regulations, which can be
found on our website at:
https://judicialconduct.judiciary.gov.uk.
Appeal Rights
If you are not satisfied with this response you have the right to request an internal review by
responding in writing to one of the addresses below within two months of the date of this
response.
xxxx.xxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Disclosure Team, Ministry of Justice, 10.38, 102 Petty France, London, SW1H 9AJ
You do have the right to ask the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to investigate any
aspect of your complaint. However, please note that the ICO is likely to expect internal
complaints procedures to have been exhausted before beginning their investigation.
Yours sincerely
Nazir Rasul
Judicial Conduct Investigations Office
2