Requests for basic stats about DTIO TIO targets

The request was refused by Ministry of Defence.

Donnie Mackenzie

Dear Ministry of Defence,

I would like to request answers to the following questions under
Freedom of Information Act 2000:

With reference to the activities of the Directorate of Targeting and Information Operations (DTIO or TIO); can you tell me how many groups are on each of the following lists:

Joint Integrated Target List,

Joint Integrated Prioritized Target List,

Restricted Target List?

Can you tell me how many total individuals are (targeted/restricted) within these groups?

With reference to the activities of the Directorate of Targeting and Information Operations (DTIO or TIO); can you tell me how many individuals not part of the above groups are on each of the following lists:

Joint Integrated Target List,

Joint Integrated Prioritized Target List,

Restricted Target List?

Yours faithfully,

Donnie Mackenzie

Dear Ministry of Defence,

By law, you should have replied to my request by 4th September. Please could you explain why this deadline has not been met; and fulfill the request as soon as possible? Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

Donnie Mackenzie

Donnie Mackenzie left an annotation ()

DECISION NOTICE ISSUED BY ICO. Response directed within 35 calendar days.(29th Jan)

Sec Pol Ops-DU BM2 (Skerritt, Simon C2), Ministry of Defence

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Mackenzie,

 

PSA response to your Freedom of Information request.

We apologise for the delay in responding to you.

 

 Regards

 

Simon Skerritt

Deputy Business Manager, Defence Strategy and Priorities (DSP), 4-F-02,
Security Policy & Operations, Main Building, Ministry of Defence,
Whitehall, London SW1A 2HB. Email: [1][email address]

 

 

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
mailto:[email address]%20

Donnie Mackenzie

Dear Sec Pol Ops-DU BM2 (Skerritt, Simon C2),

Thank you for your response dated 19-2-2013. In it you set out that you believed the information was exempt based on section 23(5) and 24(2) of the Freedom of Information act.

Due to the limitations of this website I have had to upload most of this response to the following link. By providing most of the information there it is much more easily readable:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/128286396

SEC 24(2)

In the approach set out by the House of Lords on national security in relation to Sec. Of State for Home Department V Rehman (Lord Slynn at para 16), it was outlined that:

“To require the matters in question to be capable of resulting 'directly' in a threat to national security limits too tightly the discretion of the executive in deciding how the interests of the state, including not merely military defence but democracy, the legal and constitutional systems of the state need to be protected”

As covered in the document above, domestic Info-Ops are not only an affront to democracy, but are illegitimate, illegal and are thus breaching national security based on the precedent set out.

The use of section 24 to claim exemption is dependent on the requirement that there would be harm to national security if the information was released. But, as stated, the truth is to the contrary. Information Operations are a direct, continuous and extreme violation of national security. For the information to be withheld would serve to further violate national security. And I would urge caution when considering any demonstration from those involved in Info Ops Targeting that they are defending national security; since, as mentioned, 'Deception' is a key component of Information Operations.

The information I have requested is of limited specificity which would aid the public in understanding the scale to which Common Law, European Convention, HRA and the Geneva Convention are being breached by Information Operations in the UK.

SEC 23(5)

The information pertains to the numbers of people targeted by the MOD in self-appointed extra-judicial domestic military operations; not any details relevant to parties who may or may not aid such activity and come under section 23 of FOI legislation. The public should know just how many people are being illegally targeted.

Section 23 was not intended to be misappropriated for exempting the persecution of members of the public by the military. Legitimate covert operations led by parties such as those listed in Section 23 are fitting for detection of illegal activity, and this is not what Information Operations set out to do.

There is a most extreme public interest in the information I have requested being released and I am dissatisfied with the response given. As such I would like to request an internal review.

Yours sincerely,

Donnie Mackenzie

CIO-FOI-IR (MULTIUSER), Ministry of Defence

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Mackenzie,

Please see attached.

Yours sincerely,

FOI Internal Review Team

 

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site AskTheEU.org . Find out more .

AskTheEU.org