FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND THE POLICE

THE MUNICIPAL FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY ACT

Law enforcement 8. (1) A head may refuse to disclose a record if the disclosure could reasonably be expected to, (a) interfere with a law enforcement matter;

(b) interfere with an investigation undertaken with a view to a law enforcement proceeding or from which a law enforcement proceeding is likely to result;

(c) reveal investigative techniques and procedures currently in use or likely to be used in law enforcement;

(d) disclose the identity of a confidential source of information in respect of a law enforcement matter, or disclose information furnished only by the confidential source;

(e) endanger the life or physical safety of a law enforcement officer or any other person;

(f) deprive a person of the right to a fair trial or impartial adjudication;

(g) interfere with the gathering of or reveal law enforcement intelligence information respecting organizations or persons;

(h) reveal a record which has been confiscated from a person by a peace officer in accordance with an Act or regulation;

(i) endanger the security of a building or the security of a vehicle carrying items, or of a system or procedure established for the protection of items, for which protection is reasonably required;

(j) facilitate the escape from custody of a person who is under lawful detention;

(k) jeopardize the security of a centre for lawful detention; or

(l) facilitate the commission of an unlawful act or hamper the control of crime. R.S.O. 1990, c. M.56, s. 8 (1); 2002, c. 18, Sched. K, s. 14 (1).

Idem

(2) A head may refuse to disclose a record,

(a) that is a report prepared in the course of law enforcement, inspections or investigations by an agency which has the function of enforcing and regulating compliance with a law;

(b) that is a law enforcement record if the disclosure would constitute an offence under an Act of Parliament;

(c) that is a law enforcement record if the disclosure could reasonably be expected to expose the author of the record or any person who has been quoted or paraphrased in the record to civil liability; or

(d) that contains information about the history, supervision or release of a person under the control or supervision of a correctional authority. R.S.O. 1990, c. M.56, s. 8 (2); 2002, c. 18, Sched. K, s. 14 (2). Refusal to confirm or deny existence of record

(3) A head may refuse to confirm or deny the existence of a record to which subsection (1) or (2) applies. R.S.O. 1990, c. M.56, s. 8 (3). Exception

(4) Despite clause (2) (a), a head shall disclose a record that is a report prepared in the course of routine inspections by an agency that is authorized to enforce and regulate compliance with a particular statute of Ontario. R.S.O. 1990, c. M.56, s. 8 (4).

Idem

(5) Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to a record on the degree of success achieved in a law enforcement program including statistical analyses unless disclosure of such a record may prejudice, interfere with or adversely affect any of the matters referred to in those subsections. R.S.O. 1990, c. M.56, s. 8 (5).

Remedies for Organized Crime and Other Unlawful Activities Act, 2001

8.1 A head may refuse to disclose a record and may refuse to confirm or deny the existence of a record if disclosure of the record could reasonably be expected to interfere with the ability of the Attorney General to determine whether a proceeding should be commenced under the Remedies for Organized Crime and Other Unlawful Activities Act, 2001, conduct a proceeding under that Act or enforce an order made under that Act. 2001, c. 28, s. 23 (1); 2002, c. 18, Sched. K, s. 15.

Prohibiting Profiting from Recounting Crimes Act, 2002

8.2 A head may refuse to disclose a record and may refuse to confirm or deny the existence of a record if disclosure of the record could reasonably be expected to interfere with the ability of the Attorney General to determine whether a proceeding should be commenced under the Prohibiting Profiting from Recounting Crimes Act, 2002, conduct a proceeding under that Act or enforce an order made under that Act. 2002, c. 2, ss. 16 (1), 19 (8); 2002, c. 18, Sched. K, s. 16.

INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDERS

• In ORDER M-849, the appellant requested access to the "major news reports-occurrences" (the Occurrence Sheets) and "major news reports-arrest and story" sheets (the Arrest Sheets), in computerized format.
• The Police denied access to the records, claiming that they qualify for exemption under section 14(1) of the Act (invasion of privacy).
• The Police stated in their representations that they had no objection to releasing the Occurrence Sheets, as they contained no personal information.
• The Arrest Sheets, on the other hand, contain the name and address of the person who has been charged, the charges, and a description of the facts leading to the arrest.
• The adjudicator (Tom Mitchinson, Assistant Commissioner) ordered the police to grant access to the Occurrence Sheets in full, and the Arrest Sheets with all personal information blanked out.
• In ORDER MO-1767, the appellant made several request to the Toronto Police, including “statistics with respect to the use of the Taser on emotionally disturbed persons” and “information relating to how apprehensions pursuant to the Mental Health Act are documented, in particular, how Mental Health Act apprehensions are included on CPIC [Canadian Police Information Centre] entries.”
• Quote from ORDER MO-1767: “the CPIC system provides a general repository into which the various police jurisdictions within Canada enter electronic representations of information they collect and maintain.”
• The adjudicator ordered the police to grant access to all the records requested by the appellant.