Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to LA FOIP, Chapter3, Access to Records. Updated 5 May 2023. 51 IPC Findings In Review Report 108-2019, the Commissioner considered whether the City of Regina (the City) met its legislated timeline to respond to the applicant. The City stated to the applicant it was relying on subsection 12(1)(a)(i) and (b) of LA FOIP to extend the time period to extend the period to respond to the access request. The City provided its section 7 response to the applicant approximately one week after the deadline to respond. The applicant requested that the Commissioner review the City’s timeline to respond and found that it had not met its legislated obligation. In Review Report 063-2015 to 077-2015 the Commissioner considered the equivalent provision in The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP). The Commissioner considered a lack of a section 7 response by the Ministry of Health (Health). The applicant had submitted 15 access to information requests over the course of four months. When no response was received to any of the requests, the applicant requested a review by the Commissioner. The Commissioner found that Health did not respond to the access to information requests within the legislated timeline of 30 days. The Commissioner recommended that Health respond to the remaining access to information requests within a week of the issuance of the Commissioner’s report. The Commissioner also recommended that Health conduct a lean event within a month of issuance of the Commissioner’s report to address its issues with routing, review, and approval of responses to access to information requests. In Review Report 064-2016 to 076-2016 the Commissioner considered the equivalent provision in The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP). The Commissioner considered the Guidelines for Government Communications Activities During a General Election and its impact on the timing of responses by government institutions. The Commissioner found that the guidelines do not distinguish a separate protocol for freedom of information requests filed by the media. Furthermore, FOIP did not speak to special handling of requests because of an election. As such, access to information requests should be handled routinely during elections or the period before an election.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==