{"id":9085,"date":"2010-01-31T09:53:24","date_gmt":"2010-01-31T15:53:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rankexploits.com\/musings\/?p=9085"},"modified":"2010-01-31T10:51:28","modified_gmt":"2010-01-31T16:51:28","slug":"foi-maybe-there-will-be-charges-filed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/rankexploits.com\/musings\/2010\/foi-maybe-there-will-be-charges-filed\/","title":{"rendered":"FOI: Will charges be filed?"},"content":{"rendered":"

As some of you are aware, the Information Commission Office found that provisions of the UK FOI statutes were violated with regard to David Holland’s requests made in 2007 and 2008. However, they also reported a statute of limitations prevented them from filing charges. Today, Christopher Booker<\/a> suggests that interpretation of the statue of limtations is incorrect, writing:<\/p>\n

Careful examination of the Act, however, shows that it says nothing whatever about a time limit. The Commission appears to be trying to confuse this with a provision of the Magistrates Act, that charges for an offence cannot be brought more than six months after it has been drawn to the authorities’ attention \u00e2\u20ac\u201c not after it was committed. In this case, the Commission only became aware of the offence two months ago when the emails were leaked \u00e2\u20ac\u201c showing that the small group of British and American scientists at the top of the IPCC were discussing with each other and with the university ways to break the law, not least by destroying evidence, an offence in itself.<\/p>\n

The Commission is thus impaled on a hook of its own devising. By admitting that serious offences were committed, it is now legally obliged to bring charges.<\/em> And if these were brought under the 1977 Criminal Law Act, alleging that the offences amounted to a conspiracy to defy the law, there is no time limit anyway<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I don’t know whether Booker’s interpretation is correct. Does anyone know any attorney’s familiar with UK’s FOI provisions?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

As some of you are aware, the Information Commission Office found that provisions of the UK FOI statutes were violated with regard to David Holland’s requests made in 2007 and 2008. However, they also reported a statute of limitations prevented them from filing charges. Today, Christopher Booker suggests that interpretation of the statue of limtations … Continue reading FOI: Will charges be filed?<\/span> →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[134],"tags":[357,121,256],"class_list":["post-9085","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics","tag-climategate","tag-foi","tag-ico"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/rankexploits.com\/musings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9085","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/rankexploits.com\/musings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/rankexploits.com\/musings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rankexploits.com\/musings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rankexploits.com\/musings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9085"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/rankexploits.com\/musings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9085\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/rankexploits.com\/musings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9085"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rankexploits.com\/musings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9085"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rankexploits.com\/musings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9085"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}