|
Summary
|
|
During the month of June 2003, the appellants visited the Niagara Fallsview Casino (the Casino). During their visit to the Casino, the appellants were taken into custody by the Casino Enforcement Unit of the Ontario Provincial Police (the OPP). The appellants later made a request under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act) to the Ministry for access to records held by the Ministry relating to the incident, including a videotape.
The Ministry located 12 pages of responsive records and a videotape, and advised that it was granting partial access to the records. The Ministry stated that it was withholding information under section 14(1)(d), (g), (i) and (l) (law enforcement), in conjunction with section 49(a) of the Act, and under section 49(b) (personal privacy). The Ministry explained that its section 49(b) claim is based on the provisions of sections 21(2)(f) and 21(3)(b), which deal with particular aspects of personal privacy. The Ministry also stated that some of the information in the records was not responsive to the request.
The appellants appealed the Ministry’s decision to this office.
During mediation, the appellants agreed not to pursue access to:
• The withheld portions of pages 1 and 2
• The police codes withheld on the basis of section 14(1)(l), and
• The information withheld on the basis that it is non-responsive.
Because section 14(1)(l) was claimed only for the police codes, the removal of that information from the scope of the appeal during mediation means that it is not at issue in this appeal. Mediation did not resolve the other issues in the appeal and the matter proceeded to the adjudication stage of the process.
This office began the adjudication process by sending a Notice of Inquiry, setting out the facts and issues on appeal, to the Ministry and the Casino, which is an affected party. Both the ministry and the Casino responded with representations. The Ministry’s representations indicate that it no longer relies on section 14(1)(g), which is therefore no longer at issue. After receipt of the Ministry’s representations, this office sent the Notice of Inquiry to the appellants, along with the complete representations of the Ministry and the Casino. The appellants responded with representations.
|