The Editor Speaks: FOI Requests pending with no response and one that did get a response – outcome the same!
Further to Cayman lawyer Peter Polack’s Freedom of Information (FOI) on the following requests to the Royal Cayman Islands Police Force, here is an update:
No.1 – 101 days old
FOI request:
Number of persons employed by Cayman Islands Government convicted of driving while intoxicated while operating government vehicles 2011, 2012,2013.
Number of persons employed by Cayman Islands Government convicted of other traffic offences while operating government vehicles 2011, 2012,2013.
Number of persons employed by Cayman Islands Government convicted of driving while intoxicated 2011, 2012,2013.
Number of Cayman Islands Government vehicles involved in road accidents 2011,2012,2013
No.2 – 90 days old
FOI request including spent convictions:
Number of persons in the Cayman Islands with a criminal conviction.
Number of persons in the Cayman Islands with a traffic conviction if not considered a criminal conviction.
Number of persons in the Cayman Islands with a criminal conviction for murder, manslaughter, firearm, robbery and grievous bodily harm.
Number of persons in the Cayman Islands with a criminal conviction excluding murder, manslaughter, firearm, robbery and grievous bodily harm.
Number of persons convicted of drug offences.
Number of RCIPS officers with a criminal conviction.
Number of RCIPS officers with a traffic conviction.
No.3 – 14 days old
FOI Request:
1.Number of persons on police bail from 2009 until present.
2.Number of persons on police bail from 2010 until present.
3.Number of persons on police bail from 2011 until present.
4.Number of persons on police bail from 2012 until present.
5.Number of persons on police bail from 2013 until present.
6].Number of persons on police bail on September 2014.
7.Number of persons on police bail at September 2014 who have been on bail:
-over three months
-over six months
– over twelve months
– over eighteen months
– over twenty four months
– over thirty months
– over thirty six months
No.4 – 4 days old
FOI Request:
8.Number and rank of Caymanian RCIPS personnel who have left the service in 2012, 2013 and January-September 2014.
9.Number and rank of Non-Caymanian RCIPS personnel who have left the service in 2012, 2013 and January-September 2014.
10.Number and rank of Caymanian RCIPS personnel who have given notice to leave the service January-September 2014.
11.Number and rank of Non- Caymanian RCIPS personnel who have given notice to leave the service January-September 2014.
12.Number of Caymanian and Non-Caymanian with rank in the RCIPS at September 2014.
END
There was absolutely no response from the RCIPS. The requests were all ignored.
However, there is some good news. When Polack wrote to the Attorney General on October 20 2014 requesting FOI on the following ……..
“1. Number of days in 2011 and 2012 the Attorney-General travelled with the
Premier on official business_
2_ Destinations with number of days in 2010,2011 and 2012 the Attorney-General
travelled with the Premier on official business.
3_ Number and description of other government officials travelling with the
Attorney-Generalfor No_2 above.
4_ Purposes of travel on official business with dates_
5_ Official travel expenses including accommodation of the Attorney-General not
covered by the Attorney-General in 2010, 2011, 2012 giving breakdown with
third party paying and total expenditure by year. “
……he received a fast response.
In a letter dated 31st October 2014 from the Information Manager for the Portfolio of Legal Affairs it said:
“We have conducted the necessary research and found no records responsive to your request”.
So is this a new tactic? They can find no records responsive to the request.
The Information Manager did give Polack two options to appeal that I expect he is very grateful for knowing:
- An Internal Review. That will take 30 days.
- If that fails Polack can appeal to the Information Commissioner – and he has 30 days to do this.
Unfortunately, all the examples given where Polack can execute his right (listed as a-e) do not cover the reply he got – remember they [A.G’s Chambers] conducted the necessary research and “found no records responsive” to his request.
I am quite sure they spent hours and hours trying to hunt down the information requested, but it does seem strange the Attorney General’s Chambers do not keep records of these matters – days AG travelling with premier, destinations, number and descriptions of other government officials travelling with AG, purposes of travel and expenses, etc.
Perhaps the Auditor General should be informed that the AG’s Chambers do not keep these records?
Or they might find them in time for the next Audit.
Maybe….. (but will they inform Peter Polack – “Hi, Peter, we’ve found the records we think you requested. Sorry old chap. But, can you re-apply? You see, we’ve lost your original request.”)
