Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to FOIP, Chapter 3, Access to Records. Updated 5 May 2023. 126 An abuse of the right of access or correction is where an applicant is using the access/correction provisions of FOIP in a way that is contrary to its principles and objects. Abuse of the right of access or correction can have serious consequences for the rights of others and for the public interest. By overburdening a government institution, misuse by one person can threaten or diminish a legitimate exercise of that same right by others. Such abuse also harms the public interest since it unnecessarily adds to a government institution’s costs of complying with the Act. Once it is determined that the requests are repetitious or systematic, one must consider whether there is a pattern or type of conduct that amounts to an abuse of the right of access or correction or are made for a purpose other than to obtain access to information or correction. It is possible to have a repetitious request without there being an abuse of the right of access. For example, applicants are not always sure how to word their access requests and may submit additional requests to pinpoint the specific records they are seeking. Although the requests may be repetitious, it would not be an abuse of the right of access. Such a situation would be better handled through the duty to assist and clarification with the applicant. The following factors should be considered: • Number of requests: is the number excessive. • Nature and scope of the requests: are they excessively broad and varied in scope or unusually detailed. Are they identical to or similar to previous requests. • Purpose of the requests: are the requests intended to accomplish some objective other than to gain access. For example, are they made for “nuisance” value, or is the applicant’s aim to harass the public body or to break or burden the system. • Timing of the requests: is the timing of the requests connected to the occurrence of some other related event, such as a court or tribunal proceeding. 212 • Wording of the requests: are the requests or subsequent communications in their nature offensive, vulgar, derogatory or contain unfounded allegations. Offensive or intimidating conduct or comments by applicants is unwarranted and harmful. They can also suggest that an applicant’s objectives are not legitimately about access to 212 Four factors adopted from ON IPC Order MO-3108 at [24]. Also, in SK OIPC Review Report F-2010002 at [69].
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==