Minutes of National CCTV board relevant to Hammersmith FOI refusal

[no-cctvuk]

The issue of revealing or not revealing camera locations came up at a
National CCTV Strategy Programme Board meeting in July. The minutes
are online at:
http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/cctv/National%20CCTV%20Strategy%20Programme%20Board%20Meeting%20No%208.pdf

Incredibly they seem to think that the section 31 excuse used by
Hammersmith to hide camera locations is valid!

Here is the relevant section:
"The question of Mapping Details being requested under a Freedom of
Information Request was raised and whilst it is not an issue saying
that CCTV Operates in an area, there will be instances where the
specific location and view angle of cameras should not be disclosed.

The ICO has not produced specific guidance on this issue but below is
a link to our guidance note on Section 31 of the Freedom of
Information Act, the law enforcement exemption, which you may find
helpful.
http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/freedom_of_information/detailed_specialist_guides/section_31_law_enforcement_13_oct_06_v2.pdf

When it comes to responding to requests for information about the
exact location of CCTV cameras, the onus will be on each local
authority to decide whether releasing the information would prejudice,
or would be likely to prejudice, the prevention or detection of crime.
Section 31 is a qualified exemption which means that even if the
public authority decides that the information is exempt, they must
then consider whether it is in the public interest to disclose it.
This public interest test can only be applied on a case by case basis.

When striking the balance of public interest, the public authority has
to consider whether, and to what extent, the information has already
been released in to the public domain. As the Assistant Information
Commissioner indicated at our meeting in January, it would be
difficult to deny information about the location of cameras where this
information had already been widely publicised. An authority, for
example, may decide to disclose information about camera locations
where they are widely known but have real and genuine concerns that
releasing information such as the precise location of some more covert
cameras, and details of camera angles and frequency of use etc would
prejudice the prevention of crime and it would not be in the public
interest to disclose it.

As I mentioned at the last meeting, decisions made not to disclose the
information are open to challenge. Applicants can ask the ICO to
review the decision and ultimately this could be a matter for the
courts."

[Mark Lizar]

It would be great to press release a response to this issue.
Describing that the council is not aware of what CCTV is actually good
for, quoting Home Office research illustrating how CCTV is actually
used for crime control. Perhaps also mentioning that the use of CCTV
in this manner is disproportionate for the type of crimes they are
trying to catch. That covert use of CCTV needs a court order. etc.