Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to LA FOIP, Chapter 4, Exemptions from the Right of Access. Updated 18 Oct 2023. 85 When there is a review by the IPC, the local authority is invited to provide a submission (arguments). The local authority should describe how and why disclosure of the information in question could result in the release of information related to or used in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. A local authority cannot rely on subsection 14(1)(k.2) of LA FOIP for a record that: a) Provides a general outline of the structure or programs of a law enforcement agency; or b) Reports, by means of statistical analysis or otherwise, on the degree of success achieved in a law enforcement program (see subsection 14(2) of LA FOIP). IPC Findings In Review Report 004-2020, the Commissioner considered subsection 14(1)(k.2) of LA FOIP. The City of Moose Jaw (City) had applied subsection 14(1)(k.2) of LA FOIP to an email exchange between a City Bylaw Enforcement Officer and the City’s legal counsel. The Commissioner found that the City was acting as the prosecutor and as such could exercise prosecutorial discretion. Bylaw Enforcement Officers may act on behalf of the City as a prosecutor and may from time to time exercise prosecutorial discretion. The Commissioner found that the City’s submission did not explain how the information related to or was used in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. Therefore, subsection 14(1)(k.2) of LA FOIP was found not to apply. Subsection 14(1)(k.3) Law enforcement and investigations 14(1) A head may refuse to give access to a record, the release of which could: … (k.3) reveal a record that has been seized by a law enforcement officer in accordance with an Act or Act of Parliament; … (2) Subsection (1) does not apply to a record that: (a) provides a general outline of the structure or programs of a law enforcement agency; or
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==