MoD lose big freedom of information case on rendition documents

From the Panopticon blog:

The All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition (APG) requested information from the [MoD] on

(i) memoranda of understanding between the UK ... Iraq, Afghanistan and the USA regarding the treatment of prisoners detained in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan,

(ii) a copy of the Detentions Practices Review,

(iii) a copy of the UK’s policy on capture and joint transfer, and

(iv) statistics on detainees held in Iraq and Afghanistan. The MOD refused the requests, relying on a number of exemptions under FOIA.

For the most part, the [Information Commissioner (who initially deals with FoIA disputes)] agreed.

APG’s appeal[ed] to the Upper Tribunal... and [e]xcept as regards request (iii), its appeal has succeeded, to a limited but substantial extent. The Upper Tribunal has ordered disclosure or significantly more information than that ordered by the Commissioner.

MoD lost on the following grounds:

• that it wouldn't cost too much to obtain the documents, because it took too long to respond initially;
• that public interest over-rode claims of legal privilege;
• that it would adversely impact its dealings with other governments; and
• that the people and places named in the documents had been anonymised and so argument over personal data could not possibly apply.

The MoD won on its argument that certain documents were covered by national security. It also plans an appeal over the argument of costs of disclosing documents.

UPDATE: On a related note, is this artcile in PLoS Medicine about the complicity of medical staff in the torture of people held in Guantanamo Bay. Tweet