Hello all.
A response from the National Archives (below) was recently received by me in regard to the DEFE/24/1940 Calvine/Pitlochry UFO sighting file.
The Calvine witness's name is being witheld because of Section 40(2) of the FOI Act (2000) where:
...it would be unfair or at odds with the reason why it was collected, or where the subject had officially served notice that releasing it would cause them damage or distress.
I don't know which of the first 2 of these is being used to justify the redactions, because
all the names and addresses are being witheld (and I doubt they've all individually served notice to the National Archives).
Unfairness seems a particularly pernicious justification to me, because if it's the state's minions doing the judging, their decisions will always be fair in their eyes, even when they look grossly unfair in ours.
One cannot truly know how another person felt or feels, but it strikes me as extremely unlikely that an individual would take these allegedly
amazing photos,
voluntarily contact the MOD
and a national newspaper about them, and not expect at some point to have his name become public knowledge. Moreover, a public interest argument would, to me, override an individual's ongoing desire for anonymity (assuming, of course, that the witness had served official notice to that end, which he may not even have done), but my opinion counts for nought, of course.
The 84 year closure, which seems arbitrary at first glance, is because the authorities assume any witness was 16 at the time of a record's creation, and they also assume the witness will live up to the age of 100 and thus need the protection of ongoing anonymity. (Which is yet more bureaucratic b*ll*cks, of course, but it makes them look impartial).
Anyway, I thought it might be of potential interest/use, so it's below. Given all this blather, I think an appeal is a waste of time. If the witness won't come forward himself or is deceased, and with the photos hidden/lost/destroyed by the witness, the MoD and/or the Daily Record, the truth is almost certainly
not out there in this case.
EXPLANATORY ANNEX
Your request in full (our responses in italics)
I'm trying to research a file in the NA. It's DEFE/24/1940 and its online page is here:
https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C11483085.
I believe the file was meant to be released in its entirety on 1/1/2021, that the Ministry of Defence requested sometime in 2020 that it be kept closed, and that the NA subsequently agreed to keep the file closed until 1/1/2076. A two-part redacted version (DEFE/1940/1 and DEFE/1940/2) was released in which the Section 40 personal information remains blacked out.
I would be grateful to know the following, please:
1.Was the file in question originally due for release on 1/1/2021 in an unredacted form, i.e. before the MOD's intervention?
DEFE 24/1940 did not previously have a record opening date of 1 Jan 2021. It was closed for 30 years, with a record opening date of 1 Jan 2022.
Closure periods provide a date at which either release would be appropriate or the case for release should be reconsidered, rather than indicating that a file will be opened on a specific date. This is in line with section 46 code of practice of the Freedom of Information Act 2000: https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/information-management/foi-section-46-code-of-practice.pdf.
2. Are there any publicly available records showing:
(a) when the MOD first contacted the NA about extending the closure period for this file,
There are no publicly available records concerning the closure period of this record. The application to extend the closure was received on 16 January 2020.
(b) the reasons the MOD gave for justifying the significant extension of the closure period,
The currently redacted information is exempt under s40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, which exempts from release the personal information of a ‘third party’ (someone other than the requester), if revealing it would breach the terms of Data Protection Legislation. Data Protection Legislation prevents personal information from release if it would be unfair or at odds with the reason why it was collected, or where the subject had officially served notice that releasing it would cause them damage or distress. Personal information must be processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner as set out by Art. 5 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
It is standard government practice to assume that an individual is still living if they would not yet have reached the age of 100. If the age of an adult data subject is not known, it is assumed that they were 16 at the time of the record’s creation. Please see the explanatory annex below for further information on this exemption.
(c) what closure period the MOD's staff requested,
84 years
(d) on what date the NA reached its decision to agree to a closure extension,
(e) whether any other individual or organisation was consulted by the NA following the MOD's closure extension request for this file, and
(f) what process the NA went through in responding/agreeing to the MOD's request?
The National Archives does not make decisions on closure periods, is not consulted in order to make that decision, and does not go through an agreement process with the transferring department.
The National Archives instead reviews departments’ applications for closure prior to these applications being presented to the Advisory Council on National Records and Archives (ACNRA). This particular application was received ahead of the ACNRA’s meeting on 11 May 2020, and seen and agreed to by ACNRA on that date.
This process is detailed in the section 46 code of practice of the Freedom of Information Act 2000: https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/information-management/foi-section-46-code-of-practice.pdf.
The Advisory Council on National Records and Archives has a role in considering the wider public interest in closure, and advising the Secretary of State on the closure of public records, both individual applications and wider policy.
Further details on the role and functions of the Advisory Council can be found here - Advisory Council Status, Structure, Role and Functions (nationalarchives.gov.uk)
The closure period, FOI exemption used and reasoning applied in respect of this file is in line with the closure of other documents containing correspondence and reports of UFO sightings.
3. Given that the general public, presumably, had no input into the MOD/NA discussion regarding the decision to lengthen the closure period on this file from 2021 to 2076, is it possible to challenge that decision via an FOI request, or must this be done via an appeal to the ICO?
Anyone can submit an FOI request for review of a closed document via the ‘Submit FOI request’ button on Discovery. During the FOI request process an assessment of the closed material is made and consultation undertaken with the originating department as to whether information can be disclosed or if it remains exempt from release.
Section 40(2): Personal Information where the applicant is not the data subject
The Data Protection Legislation prevents personal information from release if it would be unfair or at odds with the reason why it was collected, or where the subject had officially served notice that releasing it would cause them damage or distress.
In this case the exemption applies because the material contains the personal information of identifiable individuals who are assumed still living.
It is standard government practice to assume that an individual is still living if they would not yet have reached the age of 100. If the age of an adult data subject is not known, it is assumed that they were 16 at the time of the records creation.
Further guidance can be found at:
http://ico.org.uk/for_organisations...0-and-regulation-13-foia-and-eir-guidance.pdf
