Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

185. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the way in which and with whom responsibility lies for investigations regarding a breach of section 52 of the Freedom of Information Act 2014; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41996/18]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Per section 43(3) of the Freedom of Information Act 2014, the Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC) is independent. I am therefore not entitled to comment on the manner in which the OIC has exercised its functions in any particular set of circumstances.

Section 52 of the 2014 Act creates a criminal offence in relation to the deliberate destruction or alteration of records with an intent to deceive while these same records are the subject of an FOI request.

It may be appropriate in the first instance to raise an alleged breach of section 52 with the organisation concerned, and to provide any evidence to support the allegation. The body itself may be best placed to initiate an investigation into relevant matters, if there is a sufficient evidential basis for it to do so. Depending on the outcome of the investigation, the organisation may be entitled to take actions including appropriate disciplinary steps, or if warranted to refer the matter to An Garda Síochána for further investigation.

Alternatively, were the OIC to find evidence of a breach of section 52 in the course of a review, it would be entitled to refer the matter to An Garda Síochána for further investigation. However, I should again emphasise that owing to its statutory independence the question of whether or not it is appropriate to take this step in a particular case is a matter solely for the OIC to determine. The 2014 Act does not confer a role on the OIC to bring or prosecute criminal proceedings in relation to a breach of section 52.

Finally, given that a contravention of section 52 is a criminal matter, it could be raised directly with An Garda Síochána. Any evidence of the alleged breach could also be provided. Again, it would be a matter for An Garda Síochána to take such steps as are appropriate in the circumstances, having regard to the available evidence.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

186. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the avenues open to a person when the Office of the Information Commissioner releases a decision on a review which contains mistakes or inaccuracies that could have impacted on the decision; if there is an option to appeal other than the High Court; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41997/18]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Freedom of Information Act 2014 provides that a formal decision by the Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC) is conclusive and binding on all parties concerned, including the public body, the requester, as well as any third parties. The OIC is independent in the performance of its functions, and has extensive powers to make necessary inquiries and obtain copies of records for the purposes of a review. In order to ensure the effective operation of the FOI system, it is important that the OIC must be entitled to bring finality to its reviews when satisfied that it is appropriate to do so. Where a party to a review is dissatisfied with the outcome, they may appeal to the High Court on a point of law, which is the appropriate means by which to challenge a decision of the OIC. It should also be noted that there is nothing to prevent a requester from making further FOI requests for any additional records that have not already been released to them.