Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Steps to Request a Correction of Personal Information or Amendment of Personal Health Information. 29 April 2025. The Analyst may attempt to mediate or informally resolve the review. Step 7: Report and Response If the IPC is not able to mediate or informally resolve the matter between the parties, the Commissioner may issue a public report. The Commissioner does not disclose the identities of applicants in its reports. The report will include the Commissioner’s findings and recommendations regarding your request for correction or amendment. After a full review, the Commissioner may recommend a correction or amendment be made to your personal information or personal health information in the record or that a notation be placed on the record. The government institution, local authority or trustee has 30 days to respond to the Commissioner and to you and state if it will comply with the Commissioner’s recommendation(s). Note that a government institution, local authority or trustee is not required to follow the Commissioner’s recommendations. Some examples of Review Reports issued by the IPC dealing with requests for correction of personal information under FOIP and LA FOIP are as follows: • In Review Report F-2014-004, the Applicant requested that Saskatchewan Government Insurance (SGI) have their personal information changed and/or removed from their claim file. The following criteria was established when considering the right of correction: 1) the information at issue must be personal and private information; 2) the information must be inexact, incomplete or ambiguous; and 3) the correction cannot be a substitution of opinion. The Commissioner found that some of the information was opinion material and, as such, would not qualify for correction. The Commissioner also found that the remainder of the information appeared to be accurate and, therefore, did not qualify for correction. The Commissioner found that SGI acted reasonably in refusing to grant the correction pursuant to subsection 32(1)(a) and instead placed a notation on the file that a correction was requested but not made. • In Review Report 147-2018, 197-2018, 008-2019, 073-2019 Investigation Report 192-2018, 221-2018, 058-2019, the Applicant felt that they were erroneously associated with a Ministry of Justice program. When an applicant is alleging a record contains errors, they must provide some argument to support the request
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==