Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to LA FOIP, Chapter3, Access to Records. Updated 5 May 2023. 94 IPC Findings In Review Report 138-2015, the Commissioner considered the equivalent provision in The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP). The Commissioner considered whether the Attorney General (Justice) permitting the applicant to view recordings was in compliance with subsection 10(3)(c) of FOIP. The applicant had requested copies of video surveillance records from the entrances of the Court of King’s Bench in Saskatoon recorded on a specific date. The applicant was not satisfied with Justice’s decision to allow him to view the recordings and wanted copies. Upon review, Justice asserted that it chose this manner of access because of court security reasons and that there was a high profile court case taking place the date the applicant specified for the recordings. The Commissioner found that subsection 10(3)(c) of FOIP had no qualifier that must be met by the government institution when opting for viewing of records other than the record needed to be a sound or video recording. In this case, the record was a video recording. As such, it was the discretion of the government institution whether to allow viewing or providing a copy. The Commissioner found that Justice was not obligated under FOIP to provide the applicant with a copy of the video recordings pursuant to subsection 10(3)(c) of FOIP. In Review Report 110-2015, the Commissioner considered the equivalent provision in The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP). The Commissioner considered whether the Saskatchewan Police Commission complied with subsection 10(3) of FOIP. The applicant requested copies of tape recordings of interviewed witnesses involved in an investigation. As the tape recordings were transcribed and part of the file, it chose to provide copies of the transcripts to the applicant. Furthermore, the original tape recordings were considered transitory once transcribed and had been destroyed. Upon review, the Commissioner found that destroying the audio recordings following transcription complied with guidance from the Saskatchewan Archives Board. Furthermore, the Commissioner found that subsection 10(3) of FOIP did not require a government institution to provide both audio and transcription copies of a record. As such, the Saskatchewan Police Commission providing a transcript of the recordings was an appropriate manner of access for the applicant.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==