FOI 616/25

REQUEST

 

I am writing to request the following information relating to South Wales Police's Zone of Safety LFR trial

 

1. A copy of the Public Safety Commissioner Strategic Development document for the proposal title "Live Facial Recognition Zones of Safety"
2. A copy of any other proposal document, project plan or similar setting out SWP's participation in the trial

 

RESPONSE

 

We consulted with our Digital services unit who have provided the following information regarding your request.

 

Question 1

 

The funding request was prepared and generated on behalf of the NPCC. Under S16 our duty to advise and assist you may wish to submit this part of your request to NPCC using the link provided below:

 

https://www.npcc.police.uk/contact-us/

 

Question 2

 

Your request for this information has now been considered and I am not obliged to supply the information you have requested.       

 

In relation to your request, the following exemption applies:

 

Section 14(1) – Vexatious

 

Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request for information if the request is vexatious

 

Under S.14 (1) there is no requirement to conduct a public interest test and no requirement to provide any information or to confirm or deny whether the information is held.

 

I have taken cognisance of the Information Commissioners guidance on Vexatious requests which can be found at:

 

http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_organisations/guidance_index/freedom_of_information_and_environmental_information.aspx

 

ICO guidance on the subject states:

 

‘Section 14(1) may be used in a variety of circumstances where a request, or its impact on a public authority, cannot be justified. Whilst public authorities should think carefully before refusing a request as vexatious, they should not regard section 14(1) as something which is only to be applied in the most extreme of circumstances.

In cases where the issue is not clear-cut, the key question to ask is whether the request is likely to cause a disproportionate or unjustified level of disruption, irritation or distress. This will usually be a matter of objectively judging the evidence of the impact on the authority and weighing this against any evidence about the purpose and value of the request. The public authority may also take into account the context and history of the request, where this is relevant.’   

 

One of the indicators for identifying potentially vexatious requests is:

 

“Burden on the authority - The effort required to meet the request will be so grossly oppressive in terms of the strain on time and resources, that the authority cannot reasonably be expected to comply, no matter how legitimate the subject matter or valid the intentions of the requester”

 

Accordingly, I have classified your request as vexatious under section 14(1).

 

Our evidence and considerations in applying S14, against this backdrop is as follows:

 

Firstly, Freedom of Information legislation is designed to provide opportunities whereby the public can shine a torch on the decision making and workings of a public authority. However, this does not mean that information has to automatically be disclosed. To do so without significant thought process would be reckless and, in this case, could lead to the disclosure of exempt information.

 

There are number of drafts of the project plan in relation to this project, which includes thousands of pages. All of this information would require a manual review by our DSD (Digital Services Division) with a view to identifying harm in disclosure and redacting the exempt information accordingly.  Any potentially exempt information cannot easily be isolated because it is scattered throughout the requested material. The information would also need to be reviewed by a member of the Freedom of Information Team so that the correct exemptions could be applied, and the public interest test carried out, where applicable.

 

It is impossible to quantify the length of time this task would take but we can safely say that it would be in excess of what could be reasonably expected to complete the initial review alone. It is not in the public interest to detract resources from a small team with a high workload whose main function is the core policing purpose of adhering to the Freedom of Information legislation. Such an abstraction would negatively affect this purpose.

 

I would also draw your attention to a decision notice issued by the Information Commissioner which dealt with the burdensome aspect of Section 14. This Decision Notice stated that although there was a weighty public interest in disclosure, the sheer volume of information meant that there was a ‘grossly oppressive burden’. 

 

https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2015/1043411/fs_50561528.pdf

 

In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this letter acts as a refusal notice for your request.