Hi all,
well, I'm back from my travels and ready to continue where I left off...
Back in February 09, I wrote to the MoD and asked for the following documentation:
• Correspondence to the MoD from the Mr Hutton, or his representative, in respect of the Chinook accident on the Mull of Kintyre, 2 June 1994.
• Correspondence to Mr Hutton, or his representative, from the MoD in respect of the Chinook accident on the Mull of Kintyre, 2 June 1994.
• Copies of any press briefings, and responses to be given to media questions, supplied to Mr Hutton, or his representative, in relation to questions being asked about his decision not to overturn the verdict of the Reviewing Officers.
• Correspondence to serving members of the Armed Services from Mr Hutton, or his representative, in relation to the Chinook accident on the Mull of Kintyre, 2 June 1994.
• Correspondence from serving members of the Armed Services to Mr Hutton, or his representative, in relation to the Chinook accident on the Mull of Kintyre, 2 June 1994.
• Correspondence to retired members of the Armed Services from Mr Hutton, or his representative, in relation to the Chinook accident on the Mull of Kintyre, 2 June 1994.
• Correspondence from retired members of the Armed Services to Mr Hutton, or his representative, in relation to the Chinook accident on the Mull of Kintyre, 2 June 1994.
• Correspondence to any individual associated, in any way, with the original Board of Inquiry into the Chinook accident on the Mull of Kintyre, 2 June 1994 from Mr Hutton, or his representative.
• Correspondence to from any individual associated, in any way, with the original Board of Inquiry into the Chinook accident on the Mull of Kintyre, 2 June 1994 to Mr Hutton, or his representative.
• Documentation relating to any meeting attended by Mr Hutton, or his representative, in relation to the Chinook accident on the Mull of Kintyre, 2 June 1994. (Including, but not restricted to, agendas and minutes of said meeting).
Unusually, for the MoD, they chose simply to ignore my request, not even bothering to acknowledge my letter. This resulted in my lodging a formal complaint with the Information Commissioner's Office. On return from my travels, I have received the following email from the ICO:
Your information request to the Ministry of Defence (MoD)
Thank you for your correspondence received on 24/08/09 in which you complain about the MoDs failure to respond to your information request. I spoke to their representative last week in an effort to ascertain that they had in fact received your request and to get a status update on its progress. Unfortunately that verbal request did not generate the information I was looking for.
In cases such as this the Commissioner does not consider that serving a formal decision notice would serve any strong public interest. However, I have written to the public authority to provide them with a copy of your original request reminding it of its responsibilities and asking it to respond to you within 20 working days of receiving our letter. I enclose a copy for your information.
As you will see even though the Commissioner does not intend to issue a formal notice in this case, your concerns have been taken seriously. Thank you for bringing this matter to the attention of the Information Commissioner.
If the MoD responds and refuses to release the information you have asked for and you are dissatisfied, you may, after exhausting their internal complaints procedure, complain to us again.
This case has now been closed with the delayed response element showing as withdrawn on our records. If you do not receive a response within 20 working days or are dissatisfied after having exhausted the internal review process mentioned above and would like us to look into the matter, please contact us quoting the reference number on this letter.
Although the ICO state they will not pursue the matter further, I will not let this go. The MoD are still within the 20 day compliance period, so let's see if they are going to disclose what is requested. One wonders why they appear to be reluctant to do so. I also think that the evidence provided by this, and many other PPRuNe threads and the list of signatures on the Campaign website will suggest to the ICO that disclosure is in the public interest!
The Campaign continues.
My best, as always,
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook