|
|
Document
|
|
PO-1912
|
|
|
/ifq?>
|
File #
|
|
PA-000128-1
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of the Solicitor General
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: The Ministry of the Solicitor General (the Ministry) received the following request for access to certain information under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ): The records to which access is requested includes all records relating to the involvement of the Ontario Provincial Police in [the appellant's] pursuit and apprehension on or about January 13, 2000. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, we require [1] the log of communication between and amongst officers and dispatch in connection with the pursuit and apprehension, [2] any use of force, suspect injury or other reports, [3] the notebook excerpts in respect of all officers connected with the pursuit and apprehension, [4] any occurrence reports or [5] statement made by or to [the appellant], [6] any complaints made by [the appellant] in respect of his treatment and [7] any videotapes and photographs taken for the purpose of identification or the documentation of injuries. It is also requested that we be provided with [8] the full names of all persons otherwise identified by badge numbers on the documents disclosed pursuant to this request. The Ministry denied access to all responsive records on the basis that they "concern a matter that is currently under investigation and/or before the courts". The requester, now the appellant, appealed the Ministry's decision. The investigation referred to by the Ministry was subsequently completed, after which the Ministry issued a revised decision letter to the appellant, disclosing a number of responsive records, and including an index identifying the records and exemptions claimed for each of them. The Ministry's index contains 27 pages of responsive records, as well as one dispatcher log tape. The 27 pages consisted of the following: pages 1-13 - police officers' notebook entries pages 14-21 - police officers' statements page 22 - Occurrence Report pages 23-24 - Motor Vehicle Accident Report pages 25-27 - Use of Force Reports The Ministry granted full access to pages 1, 2, 4, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 21, and partial access to pages 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 19, 20, 22, 23 and 24. The Ministry denied access to the remaining portions of these pages and to pages 25, 26 and 27 and the dispatcher log tape in their entirety on the basis of one or more of the following exemption claims: section 49(a), with reference to sections 14(1)(c), (e) and (l) and section 14(2)(a) section 49(b), with reference to sections 21(2)(f) and 21(3)(a), (b) and (d). The Ministry also withheld certain police officers' notebook entries and portions of the Occurrence Report on the basis that they relate to other policing activities and were not responsive to the request. In its supplementary decision, the Ministry also stated that the appellant had not provided statements to the Ontario Provincial Police (the OPP), nor did he make any complaints regarding his treatment. The Ministry also advised the appellant that no videotapes or photographs were taken for the purpose of identifying or documenting injuries suffered by OPP officers. During mediation, a number of events occurred: the appellant withdrew his appeal regarding items 4 - 8 of his request, thereby removing the undisclosed portions of pages 23 and 24 from the scope of the appeal; the appellant agreed not to pursue access to the so-called "ten codes" used by the police officers which are included on certain pages of the records and on the dispatch log tape; the appellant agreed not to pursue access to the information identified by the Ministry as non-responsive, thereby removing pages 10, 13 and 22 from the scope of the appeal. A Notice of Inquiry was sent initially to the Ministry, which submitted representations in response. A modified Notice was then sent to the appellant along with a complete copy of the Ministry's representations. The appellant chose not to provide any representations. I decided to provide the Notice of Inquiry to eight police officers who were involved in the incident and whose interests might be affected by the outcome of the appeal (the affected persons). I received representations from a lawyer representing three of the affected persons, stating that they did not consent to the disclosure of information relating to them. In its representations, the Ministry withdrew its reliance on sections 14(1)(c), 14(1)(e) and 14(2)(a) of the Act . Accordingly, these exemptions are no longer at issue in this appeal. RECORDS: The following records or partial records, along with the relevant exemption claims, remain at issue in this appeal: the undisclosed portions of pages 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 (police officers' notebook entries), and pages 19 and 20 (police officers' statements) - section 49(b) (with reference to sections 21(2)(f) and 21(3)(b)); pages 25 - 27 (Use of Force Reports) - section 49(b) (with reference to sections 21(2)(e), (f) and (h) and 21(3)(b) and (d)); and the dispatcher log tape - section 49(a) (with reference to section 14(1)(l)), and section 49(b) (with reference to sections 21(2)(f) and 21(3)(b)). DISCUSSION: PERSONAL INFORMATION The Ministry provides the following representations regarding section 2(1). Personal information is further defined in section 2(1) to include: (a) information relating to the ... sex ... of the individual, (c) any identifying number, symbol or other particular, (d) the address, telephone number ... of the individual, (e) the personal opinions or views of the individual except where they relate to another individual, (f) correspondence sent to an institution by the individual that is implicitly or explicitly of a private or confidential nature, and replies to that correspondence that would reveal the contents
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
-
FIPPA
-
21(2)(e)
-
21(2)(f)
-
21(2)(h)
-
21(3)(b)
-
49(b)
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Tom Mitchinson
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Jun 19, 2001
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|