top of page
Search

Kent Police: FOI Internal Review FOI/01299/22

Kent Police: FOI Internal Review FOI/01299/22

Yahoo

/

Inbox

Freedom of Information Kent <freedomofinformation@kent.police.uk>

To:

Shantanu Panigrahi

Fri, 17 Mar at 16:08


Dear Dr Panigrahi,


Please find attached the result of the internal review of FOI/01299/22.


Yours sincerely,

Alan Muggridge (he/him)

Public Disclosure Officer

Information Management

Kent Police


This email and any other accompanying document(s) contain information from Kent Police and/or Essex Police, which is confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) or bodies to whom it is addressed. The content, including any subsequent replies, could be disclosable if relating to a criminal investigation or civil proceedings. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or other use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately by contacting the sender or telephoning Kent Police on 01622 690690 or Essex Police on 01245 491491, as appropriate. For further information regarding Kent Police’s or Essex Police’s use of personal data please go to https://www.kent.police.uk/hyg/privacy/ or https://www.essex.police.uk/hyg/privacy/. Additionally for our Terms and Conditions please go to https://www.kent.police.uk/hyg/terms-conditions/ or https://www.essex.police.uk/hyg/terms-conditions/

Attachment:

FOI-01299-22 Internal Review.pdf 131.1kB:


FOI-01299-22 Internal Review (3)
.pdf
Download PDF • 134KB

____________________________________________________________________

KENT POLICE

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

Dr Shantanu Panigrahi

shantanupanigrahi@yahoo.com

Direct Line: 01622 652610

E-mail: freedomofinformation@kent.police.uk

Date: 17 March 2023

FOI Ref: FOI/01299/22

Dear Dr. Pinigrahi,

Freedom of Information Internal Review FOI/01299/22

Following our response to your application under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), you expressed dissatisfaction and requested on 6 January 2023 an Internal Review of our decision.

Original request

Received on 22 October 2022:

1) I would be grateful if you would provide me with a breakdown of all the statistics of cars drivers that have been prosecuted daily for exceeding the 50-mph speed limit along the A229 northbound and southbound accordingly

2) what did Kent Police determine as to the identities of people calling themselves VOPA (standing for Victims of [Name provided] Association) such as [Name provided], [Name provided], [Name provided], [Name provided], [Name provided], [Name provided]and [Name provided].

3) what information did Kent Police determine as to who sent 27 odd malicious emails from my hacked email accounts to [Name provided] of the Conservative and Libertarian Party bp and staff of BLM Law - please send me copies of all those emails.

4) What are the grounds upon which Kent Police continue to retain our desk-top computer, Amazon Fire, USB Memory Stick, and Mobile Phone and have not erased the Biometrics data held on me at North Kent Police under Custody?

5) What were the individual reports of PC [Name provided], Wc [Name provided], PC [Name provided], and DS [Name provided]to the complaints lodged against Police Force over the past year?

6) When was the first referral made by Kent Police for advice to the Crown Prosecution Service on whether there were sufficient evidence to charge me with any or all the offences like stalking, harassment, treason, sedition, and others still unspecified as I read between the lines.

7) On which dates were Crime Reference numbers assigned to any or all the offences that I am supposed to have been suspected of.

8) Why have I not been charged with any offences as of the time of this email that I am sending?

Kent Police : PSD FOI

Form 3540b rev Jan 2011 [erev 2/11] v1

Procedure

A response was provided to the original request under FOIA on 18 November 2022, in compliance with Section 10(1) FOIA. The initial response provided information in full for question 1, with a neither confirm nor deny refusal for questions 2 through 8 by virtue of the exemption at Section

40(5A)(5B) Personal information.

Complaint and application of exemptions

Questions 2 through 8 ask for information which may be held by Kent Police on yourself as well as named third-party data subjects.

Any information disclosed under FOIA is considered a release into the public domain, and not just to the person making the request. Owing to the public nature of responses issued under FOIA, Kent Police must consider whether it is appropriate to confirm or deny into the public domain if the requested information is held.

For first-party data, Section 40(5A) FOIA states the duty to confirm or deny does not arise in relation to information which is (or if it were held by the public authority would be) exempt information by virtue of subsection (1), which states any information to which a request for information relates is exempt information if it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is the data subject.

This means that a request for any information Kent Police may hold on you cannot be provided to you under FOIA legislation, and you would be advised to make a request for your own data by means of a Subject Access Request which can be done by following instructions on the Kent Police website: https://www.kent.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/data-pro/data-protection/

For third-party data, Section 40(5B)(a)(i) FOIA states that the duty to confirm or deny does not arise in relation to information if it would contravene any of the data protection principles. The first data protection principle is that any disclosure must be considered lawful and fair, in that disclosure should be reasonably expected by the data subject and not cause any adverse impact on the data subject.

Without the explicit informed consent of the data subjects involved, confirmation or denial in this case would breach the first data protection principle since it would not be lawful. Article 5 UK GDPR details the first data protection principle, it states: Personal data shall be processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner in relation to the data subject. Processing includes disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available.

There is no requirement to consider the public interest when engaging this exemption. The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) provides guidance on the use of Section 40(5) which states:

This subsection refers to giving the confirmation or denial “to a member of the public”. This reflects the fact that, in general terms, FOIA is concerned with disclosure to the world, and not to the particular individual who submitted the request.

https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/2614719/neither-confirm-nor-deny-inrelation-to-personal-data-section-40-5-and-regulation-13-5-v20.pdf

Kent Police : PSD FOI

Form 3540b rev Jan 2011 [erev 2/11] v1

Conclusion

I am satisfied in this instance that the initial response was appropriate.

As part of conducting this internal review I have read additional correspondence you have sent to us which contains abusive and aggressive language along with threats to police officers, named members of staff within the Public Disclosure Team, and members of the public outside of Kent Police. This behaviour cannot be overlooked, and I am compelled to direct your attention to ICO guidance when considering a request as vexatious:

In some cases it will be easy to recognise that a request is vexatious. For example, the tone or content of the request might be so objectionable that it would be unreasonable to expect your authority to tolerate it, no matter how legitimate the purpose of the requester or substantial the value of the requested information. Such as where threats have been made against employees, or offensive language used.

We do not expect you to make allowances for the value or purpose of the request under these kinds of circumstances.

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guidance-index/freedom-of-information-and-environmentalinformation-regulations/dealing-with-vexatious-requests-section-14/what-does-vexatious-mean/

This abusive and aggressive behaviour will be taken into consideration should you choose to submit any further requests to Kent Police, in line with Section 14(1) Vexatious requests.

Should you be unhappy with the result of this review I remind you of your right under Section 50 to appeal to the Information Commissioner, who can be contacted at the following address:

Customer Contact

Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Yours sincerely,

Alan Muggridge

Public Disclosure Officer

15 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Re: Fwd: Signature

Re: Fwd: Signature Inbox Stripe from:    Shantanu Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com> to:          Stripe Support <accounts@stripe.com> cc:         genna.ajram@join-it-a33ede169b68.intercom-mail.c

MEMBERSHIP IS ESSENTIAL

MEMBERSHIP IS ESSENTIAL Yahoo/Sent Shantanu Panigrahi From:shantanupanigrahi@yahoo.com To:lauren.shapiro@eventproexcel.com Sat, 13 Jul at 15:13 Dear Lauren Shapiro Please let me know if you are intere

Comments


bottom of page