Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to LA FOIP, Chapter 4, Exemptions from the Right of Access. Updated 18 Oct 2023. 62 (b) reports, by means of statistical analysis or otherwise, on the degree of success achieved in a law enforcement program. Subsection 14(1)(f) of LA FOIP is a discretionary class-based exemption. It permits refusal of access in situations where release of a record could disclose the identity of a confidential source of information, or disclose information furnished by that source with respect to a lawful investigation or a law enforcement matter. The following two-part test can be applied: 1. Could the information disclose the identity of a confidential source? Section 14 of LA FOIP uses the word could versus “could reasonably be expected to” as seen in other provisions of LA FOIP. The threshold for could is somewhat lower than a reasonable expectation. The requirement for could is simply that the release of the information could have the specified result. There would still have to be a basis for the assertion. If it is fanciful or exceedingly remote, the exemption should not be invoked.232 For this provision to apply there must be objective grounds for believing that disclosing the information could disclose the identity of a confidential source of information or disclose information furnished by a confidential source. Identity includes the name and any identifying characteristics, symbols and numbers relating to the source.233 A confidential source is someone who has provided information with the assurance that his or her identity will remain secret. There must be evidence of the circumstances in which the information was provided to establish whether the source is confidential.234 The local authority should establish that the source of the information qualifies as a confidential source.235 2. Could disclosure reveal information that was provided by the confidential source with respect to a lawful investigation or law enforcement matter? Section 14 of LA FOIP uses the word could versus “could reasonably be expected to” as seen in other provisions of LA FOIP. The threshold for could is somewhat lower than a reasonable 232 SK OIPC Review Reports LA-2007-001 at [117], LA-2013-001 at [35], F-2014-001 at [149]. 233 Service Alberta, FOIP Guidelines and Practices: 2009 Edition, Chapter 4 at p. 150. 234 Service Alberta, FOIP Guidelines and Practices: 2009 Edition, Chapter 4 at p. 150. 235 SK OIPC Review Reports 93/021 at pp. 7 to 8, 95/012 at p. 4, 2000/028 at [13], F-2014-001 at [218].
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==