We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Donnie Mackenzie please sign in and let everyone know.

Targeted people within HM Prison Service

We're waiting for Donnie Mackenzie to read a recent response and update the status.

Dear HM Prison Service,

With reference to Prison Service Instruction 22/2012: 'Secret' Surveillance of Prisoners, I would like to request the following under Freedom of Information legislation.

According to the publicly released version of the document, under the section entitled Mandatory Action:

1.12 Overt CCTV cameras must not be used for pre planned target use against prisoners or visitors unless supported by an appropriate RIPA authorisation.

Can you confirm that targets would include specific people or groups of people who are put under surveillance within prison, as the document seems to indicate?

Can you tell me how many specific people have been authorised to be put under surveillance within HM Prison Service at date of writing?

Can you tell me how many of these were not pre-planned, and how many were pre-planned?

Yours faithfully,

Donnie Mackenzie

Clifford, Barney [NOMS],

1 Attachment

Please see the attached file.

Best wishes,

Barney Clifford
Key Threat Manager - Intelligence
Security Group, National Offender Management Service
Clive House, 70 Petty France, London, SW1H 9EX
T: 0300 047 6171 | E: [email address]
M: | 07920 157388

The Key Threats team is currently working on Corruption Prevention, Drugs,
Intelligence and Mobile Phones

<<2012 11 01 FOI 78615 - Mackenzie (final 1).doc>>

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Dear Mr Clifford,

Thank you for you response dated 26/11/12. Whilst I am disappointed with the lateness of it's arrival and lack of an explanation for this; I am satisfied that you have afforded it due consideration within that time.

In response to my questions you have stated that the information requested is held, and that one of the bodies who is able to undertake surveillance of prisoners includes the National Offender Management Service. Further to this you stated that the information is exempt in your belief and provided text as follows:

---------------------
MOJ QUOTE
“I can confirm that we hold the information that comes within the scope of this part of your request but we believe it is exempt from the duty to disclose by virtue of Section 31 (1) (a) of the Freedom of Information Act. This provides that information is exempt if it's disclosure under the act would, or would be likely to prejudice the prevention and detection of crime. We also believe that the information is exempt under Section 31 (1) (f) of the Act, which provides that information is exempt if it's disclosure would, or would be likely to prejudice the maintenance of security and good order in prisons”
---------------------

You also provided examples of the public interest considerations which included “transparency” and “understanding”. And then you provided the following arguments against releasing the statistics:

--------------------
MOJ QUOTE
“ the information could be used to subvert the effective use of RIPA powers by indicating the extent to which powers can be used over a specific period. This information would prove invaluable to those engaged in criminality within prisons, either as individuals or as part of an organised crime group, and would confirm the extent to which covert surveillance was undertaken . This could lead criminals to alter their behaviour and methods, which could in turn frustrate investigations and our ability to counter criminality in prisons”
-------------------------

I would like to state that it is my belief that the public interest in this information being released outweighs any desire to have it withheld.

With regard to Section 31 (1) (f), I do not believe there is a sound argument for withholding the information. I believe that the information is far too general and non-specific to prejudice 'security' or 'good order'. From what I can glean there are around 130 prisons in England and Wales under HMPS. It would be impossible for any particular party to say conclusively whether or not they were one of the targets based on the overall figure-unless that figure was close to the total prisoner population. If I had asked for information about one prison where the number under surveillance was unusually high, then this argument might hold more weight, but this is not the case.

With regard to Section 31 (1) (a), I do not believe there is a sound argument for withholding the information either. Again I think the statistics are far too general, non-specific and far removed to pose serious risk to crime prevention or detection. Had I asked for details of the day to day operations then this might be the case, but this is not what I am asking for.

In fact I would contend that the opposite is more likely to be true. Where prisoners see that there is a possibility they might be under surveillance; many might be less likely to risk carrying out a serious crime as they could cause more problems for themselves; in the same way that a speeding driver is less inclined to break the limit if they believe there could be speed cameras nearby.

In addition, the information wouldn't indicate the extent to which powers can be used over a “specific period” as you say, because I have not asked for any information about the length of time someone would be under surveillance. Without this or any dates, such assertions could not be made.

These are the public interest arguments in favour of releasing the statistics as I see them:

-Greater understanding of the perceived/presented potential criminal activity level

-Indications of the volume of resources being dedicated to the prevention/detection

-Possible opportunities for public discussion on approaches to dealing with the relevant criminal risk

-Victims of crimes who perceive a continuing risk from offenders may be reassured

-Those with information relevant to potential crimes (in connection with prisoners) might be encouraged to come forward and provide information crucial to preventing crimes.

So I would like to finish by requesting an Internal Review.

Thanks again

Yours sincerely,

Donnie Mackenzie

Donnie Mackenzie

Response passed to ICO on 1st February. Response passed from ICO to me on 20th February.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/129374549/MOJ-...

Data Access & Compliance Unit, HM Prison Service

1 Attachment

Dear Mr McKenzie
 
Please see the attached letter in reference to your previous request with
the Ministry of Justice.
 
Kind regards
 
Data Access and Compliance Unit

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy
all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Dear Data Access & Compliance Unit,

Thanks for your revised response.

In your response you stated your belief that to answer my request would not be possible within the cost limit.

Part of my request which you quoted asked:

"Can you tell me how many specific people have been authorised to be put under surveillance within HM Prison Service at date of writing?"

I note that you interpreted this statement to include historic instances of surveillance, and that you also offered to consider a narrowed request.

Although I can see why you interpreted the question in such a way, it was my intention there to request statistics for surveillance active at the stated date.

With this in mind I would politely ask you to reconsider the request.

Thank you again for your response.

Yours sincerely,

Donnie Mackenzie

Clifford, Barney [NOMS],

1 Attachment

Dear Mr McKenzie,

Please find attached a reply to your request dated 31 December 2013.

Barney Clifford
Key Threat Manager - Intelligence
Security Group, National Offender Management Service
Clive House, 70 Petty France, London, SW1H 9EX
T: 0300 047 6171 | E: [email address]
M: | 07920 157388

The Key Threats team is currently working on Corruption Prevention, Drugs,
Intelligence and Mobile Phones

[1]Project Mercury - Click Here to Navigate to Intranet Site

<<2014 - FOI Donnie McKenzie - covert surveillance numbers - final.doc>>

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. http://home.hmps.noms.root/Intranet/appm...

Donnie Mackenzie left an annotation ()

22nd April 2014 Decision Notice. MOJ asked to respond.

http://ico.org.uk/~/media/documents/deci...

Barbara Richards left an annotation ()

I hope there was CCTV surveillance of the prisoners at Drake Hall prison when they took my son and his classmates from Walton Hall special school for disabled children for PE lessons without mine or the other parents knowledge and permission, but I have a nasty feeling any CCTV cameras would have been kept switched off while that was going on!

NOS_Correspondence.SG,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr McKenzie,

 

Please find attached a response to your recent FOI request, for your
attention.

 

Kind regards,

 

Oscar Rodriguez
Correspondence Administrator
Security Group
National Offenders Management Services
Clive House 7^th Floor, 70 Petty France, SW1H 9EX
 

 

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Donnie Mackenzie

Oscar Rodriguez

Dear Mr Rodriguez,

Thank you for your response.

In light of the time it has taken to come to this point; I would like to politely request the same statistic for my current date of writing.

Yours sincerely,

Donnie Mackenzie

Clifford, Barney [NOMS],

1 Attachment

  • Attachment

    2014 FOI 91426 Donnie McKenzie covert surveillance numbers follow up final.doc

    85K Download View as HTML

Dear Mr Mackenzie,

Please see the attached.

Barney Clifford
Key Threat Manager - Intelligence
Security Group, National Offender Management Service
Clive House, 70 Petty France, London, SW1H 9EX
T: 0300 047 6171 | E: [email address]
M: | 07920 157388

The Key Threats team is currently working on Corruption Prevention, Drugs,
Intelligence and Mobile Phones

[1]Project Mercury - Click Here to Navigate to Intranet Site

<<2014 - FOI 91426 Donnie McKenzie - covert surveillance numbers - follow
up - final.doc>>

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. http://home.hmps.noms.root/Intranet/appm...

Donnie Mackenzie

Dear HM Prison Service,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of HM Prison Service's handling of my FOI request 'Targeted people within HM Prison Service'.

I do not believe that the application of the legislation is substantiated. I agree that the newer figure would indicate whether surveillance had increased or decreased; but such dynamic shifts would not aid any wrong doing as it (still) lacks specificity.

It is also my understanding that the analysis of the previous request by the ICO was that it was inappropriate for the information to be refused (in it's clarified form) at the actual time it was requested, rather than later.

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,

Donnie Mackenzie

Allen, Nicholas [NOMS],

1 Attachment

<<FOI91426 internal review.doc>>
Dear Mr Mackenzie,

Please see the attached, in relation to FOI91426.

Regards,

Nick

Nicholas Allen
National Intelligence Unit - Security Group
National Offender Management Service
7th Floor, Clive House, 70 Petty France, London SW1H 9EX
Tel: 03000 476991 Email: [email address]

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Donnie Mackenzie please sign in and let everyone know.

Looking for an EU Authority?

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

AskTheEU.org