Residence Workplace’s Response to Gatwick Drone FOI – sUAS Information

Expensive Requester,

Thanks on your e-mail of 23 October 2024, during which you request copies of the emails disclosed within the Freedom of Data Act request FOI2024/04564.

You particularly ask:

In FOIA FOI2024/04564 a small variety of e-mails had been recognized, I’d like copies of these, I realise some redactions could also be mandatory. Be aware the DfT put it into the general public area that the Residence Secretary accepted the usage of the Evening Fighter jammer (on this FOIA: Gatwick “drone” associated emails – a Freedom of Data request to Division for Transport – WhatDoTheyKnow) in order that doesn’t want
redacting if it’s lined inside this batch.

Your request has been dealt with as a request for data beneath the Freedom of Data Act 2000.

In relation to your request above, we will verify that the Residence Workplace holds a number of the data that you’ve got requested, and we’ve disclosed this beneath. Now we have redacted sure data as that is exempt from disclosure by advantage of the exemptions listed beneath Sections 23 (Data equipped by, or referring to, our bodies coping with safety issues), 24 (Nationwide Safety), 31 (Regulation Enforcement) 38 (Well being and Security), 40 (Private Data) of the Freedom of Data Act 2000.

In relation to the e-mail “Fwd: 20181220 – Residence Secretary and Transport Secretary Name:

Gatwick Drone Incident 21/12/2018 07:36”, we’ve carried out a radical search and we’ve established that the Residence Workplace doesn’t maintain the data which you have got requested.

In our preliminary response to FOI2024/04564, we recognized the e-mail title, time and date of every electronic mail obtained. The search didn’t get well the physique of the e-mail, solely the precise data requested within the Freedom of Data Request. Following your present request FOI: 2024/08785, we performed a radical search of related mailboxes and shared drives however sadly the physique of this specific electronic mail couldn’t be discovered.

Regrettably, subsequently, we’ve concluded that this particular data just isn’t held. Data has been withheld beneath part 40(2) of the FOIA due to the situation at part 40(3A)(a) the place this issues the private knowledge of third events. The Residence Workplace has obligations beneath knowledge safety laws and in regulation typically to guard private knowledge. This exempts private knowledge from launch if disclosure would contravene any of the info safety rules in Article 5(1) of the UK Basic Information Safety Regulation and part 34(1) of the Information Safety Act 2018. We consider launch would breach the primary knowledge safety precept, since it will be illegal and unfair to reveal the data.

Part 40 of the Act is an absolute exemption and never topic to the general public curiosity check.

Within the circumstances of this case, it’s not acceptable to supply any data that was both equipped by, or pertains to, one of many safety our bodies listed in part 23(3) of the FOIA.

We’re subsequently making use of sections 23(1) (data equipped by or referring to safety our bodies) to a part of your request. Because the exemption at part 23(1) is an absolute exemption, no proof of hurt or evaluation of the stability of the general public curiosity is required to assist its software.

Please discover additional particulars of those exemptions within the Annex to this letter. Refer beneath Annex for supporting particulars:

ANNEX: Exemptions Used
Part 23 Data equipped by, or referring to, our bodies coping with safety issues
Part 24 Nationwide Safety
Part 31 Regulation Enforcement
Part 38 Well being and Security
Part 40 Private Data
ANNEX: Public Curiosity Check (PIT)
Sections 24, 31 and 38 of the Act are certified exemptions and require consideration of the general public curiosity check. Now we have concluded the general public curiosity lies in favour of withholding the data. The arguments we thought-about, each for and in opposition to disclosure, are set out within the Annex.

ANNEX: Unique Request
ANNEX: Disclosed Data

If you’re dissatisfied with this response chances are you’ll request an impartial inner assessment of our dealing with of your request by submitting a criticism inside two months to [email protected], quoting reference 2024/08785.

Should you ask for an inner assessment, it will be useful should you might say why you might be dissatisfied with the response.

As a part of any inner assessment the Division’s dealing with of your data request will probably be reassessed by employees who weren’t concerned in offering you with this response. Should you stay dissatisfied after this inner assessment, you’d have a proper of criticism to the Data Commissioner as established by part 50 of the Freedom of Data Act.

Yours sincerely
Freedom of Data
Residence Workplace

Associated