|
|
Document
|
|
PO-1659
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
PA-980193-1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of the Solicitor General and Correctional Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
NATURE OF THE APPEAL: The Ministry of the Solicitor General and Correctional Services (the Ministry) received a request under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ). The requester is a Correctional Officer employed by the Ministry, and his request relates to the investigation of allegations made against him by staff at a named correctional facility where an inmate was being transferred from the facility to another facility. The requester wanted access to all records that involve him, either "directly or indirectly". The Ministry located 210 pages of responsive records. The requester was granted access in full to 28 pages and partial access to 29 other pages. The Ministry denied access to the remaining pages and partial pages on the basis of the invasion of privacy exemption contained in section 49(b) of the Act . The requester, now the appellant, appealed this decision. He clarified that he is only seeking access to records that name him either directly or indirectly, and also specified that he was not seeking any personal information relating to the inmate or any other identifiable individual. Before issuing my Notice of Inquiry in this appeal, I determined that, because federal legislation applies to certain records, I have no jurisdiction to consider them due to the constitutional doctrine of paramountcy. The records which proceeded to the inquiry stage are pages 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10-12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19-21, 22-23, 24, 46, 47-60, 93-106, 107-124, 125-146, 147-152, 153-191, 192-195 and 196-210. These records consist of an executive summary; the investigation report itself; a list of statements/interviews; a list of documents, occurrence and interview reports; the appellant's statement; and various witness statements. The appellant also claimed that further responsive records should exist, specifically log books, thereby raising the issue of whether the Ministry's search for responsive records was reasonable. A Notice of Inquiry was sent to the Ministry and the appellant. Representations were received from both parties. In his representations, the appellant again made it clear that he did not require any information relating to other identifiable individuals. During the course of this inquiry, the Ministry reviewed its search and provided the appellant with an index of all responsive records it had located. Based on this information, the appellant submitted additional representations in which he claimed that the following records should exist: Supervisor's log book and occurrence reports from a named correctional facility. Investigator's statements/interview with Supervisor at the named correctional facility. Finally, on the basis of these additional search activities, the Ministry identified three new records which it felt were responsive (pages 211-216). They consist of excerpts from two policy and procedures manuals and a set of "Standing Orders". The Ministry denied access to these records pursuant to sections 14(1)(j) and (k) and 49(a) of the Act . These records by their very nature do not name the appellant, directly or indirectly, nor anyone else for that matter. I find that they are outside the scope of this appeal and I will not consider them further. DISCUSSION: JURISDICTION The records which remain at issue fall into two basic categories: (1) those that relate to an incident involving the transfer of an inmate from one facility to another; and (2) those that relate to the subsequent investigation into the conduct of the appellant under section 22 of the Ministry of Correctional Services Act (the MCSA ). Because federal legislation applies to the first category of records, I find that I have no jurisdiction to consider them due to the constitutional doctrine of paramountcy. These are pages 46-60 and 153-191. I find that all records in the second category fall within the jurisdiction of the Act . SCOPE OF THE APPEAL The appellant has made it clear that he is only seeking access to records that name him either directly or indirectly, and not to the personal information of any other individuals. Pages 19-21 and 192-210 document an incident that does not involve the appellant; pages 6, 7, 93, 102, 125 (with the exception of the paragraph at the bottom of the page) and 147 contain the personal identifiers and information relating to individuals other than the appellant; and the appellant has been provided with all parts of pages 5, 22-24 and 107-124 which relate to him. Accordingly, these pages or partial pages are no longer at issue in this appeal. As a consequence of my jurisdictional findings and the scope of the appellant's request, the only records remaining at issue are the various witness statements and the summary of these statements which is recorded in the investigation report. These records are pages 3, 8, 9, 10-12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 94-101, 103-106, 125 (in part), 126-146 and 148-152. PERSONAL INFORMATION/INVASION OF PRIVACY Under section 2(1) of the Act , "personal information" is defined, in part, to mean recorded information about an identifiable individual, including the individual's name where it appears with other personal information relating to the individual or where the disclosure of the name would reveal other personal information about the individual. The records relate to the investigation into the conduct of the appellant as an employee of the Ministry. The investigation included obtaining information from the appellant as well as witnesses. The appellant has been provided with all records or partial records which contain only his personal information. I find that the remaining records or partial records contain the personal information of both the appellant and other individuals. Section 47(1) of the Act gives individuals a general right of access to their own personal information held by a government body. Section 49 provides a number of exceptions to this general right of access. Under section 49(b), where a record contains the personal information of both the appellant and other individuals, and the institution determines that the disclosure of the
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
-
FIPPA
-
21(2)(e)
-
21(2)(f)
-
21(2)(h)
-
29(1)(a)
-
49(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Tom Mitchinson
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Mar 09, 1999
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|