Tuesday, May 15, 2012

4230.txt

cc: "Mcgarvie Michael Mr \(ACAD\)" <M.McgarvieatXYZxyz.ac.uk>
date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 11:31:49 +0100
from: "Palmer Dave Mr \(LIB\)" <David.PalmeratXYZxyz.ac.uk>
subject: RE:
to: "Ogden Annie Ms \(MAC\)" <k319atXYZxyz.ac.uk>, "Jones Philip Prof \(ENV\)" <P.JonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, "Colam-French Jonathan Mr \(ISD\)" <s119atXYZxyz.ac.uk>

Annie,
One does wonder what the readership figures for these sites are however....

Of more import, the 'penetration' of the CRU server and its subsequent handling are now
common knowledge ([1]http://www.climateaudit.org/) and they are claiming that we have
breached s.77 of the FOIA (which applies to applications under EIR by the way) by removing
the relevant files from the .FTP server.

Whilst what McIntyre has quoted is entirely accurate, he hasn't told the whole story - the
entire section is below:

77 Offence of altering etc. records with intent to prevent disclosure
(1) Where--
(a) a request for information has been made to a public authority, and
(b) under section 1 of this Act or section 7 of the [1988 c. 29.] Data Protection
Act 1998, the applicant would have been entitled (subject to payment of any fee) to
communication of any information in accordance with that section,

any person to whom this subsection applies is guilty of an offence if he alters, defaces,
blocks, erases, destroys or conceals any record held by the public authority, with the
intention of preventing the disclosure by that authority of all, or any part, of the
information to the communication of which the applicant would have been entitled.

(2) Subsection (1) applies to the public authority and to any person who is employed by, is
an officer of, or is subject to the direction of, the public authority.

(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a
fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.

(4) No proceedings for an offence under this section shall be instituted--
(a) in England or Wales, except by the Commissioner or by or with the consent of
the Director of Public Prosecutions;

(b) in Northern Ireland, except by the Commissioner or by or with the consent of
the Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland.

The key point is the intent to prevent the disclosure of information to which the applicant
would otherwise be entitled. One, we maintain he is not entitled to it, and two, we are
not concealing it to prevent disclosure (as that has already happened).

This provision is to obviously stop authorities from deleting information and then claiming
they don't possess it. We are not doing that... BUT it's not good publicity on any level I
would think....

I will check with the ICO to make sure we are ok on this because a momentary 'backtrack'
would be much better than getting caught on a section 77 infraction....

Cheers, Dave

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ogden Annie Ms (MAC)
>Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 11:09 AM
>To: Jones Philip Prof (ENV); Colam-French Jonathan Mr (ISD);
>Palmer Dave Mr (LIB)
>Subject: FW:
>
>Dear all,
>In case you haven't seen this one - about a 'leak' etc...
>[2]http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/07/27/0520216/Temperature-Dat
>a-Wants-To-Be-Free?from=rss
>Annie
>-------------------------------
>Annie Ogden, Head of Communications,
>University of East Anglia,
>Norwich, NR4 7TJ.
>Tel:+44 (0)1603 592764
>[3]www.uea.ac.uk/comm
>............................................
>
>
>
>
>

No comments:

Post a Comment