Gamma International's FinFisher

Culley Palmer made this Freedom of Information request to CrimTrac

CrimTrac did not have the information requested.

From: Culley Palmer

Delivered

Dear CrimTrac,

I hereby request access, under the Freedom of Information Act (1982) to:

Copies of all briefings, communications, forms, reports or notes authored by CrimTrac in the calendar year 2013-2014, which mention or discuss Gamma International’s FinFisher suite of software.

I wish to exclude from the scope of my request:

1) Duplicates of documents and drafts;

2) The personal information of any individuals contained in the documents;

3) Documents which are already publicly known or accessible.

I suggest these exclusions to make the process more practical, and
would therefore be happy to further reframe my request if it is
helpful. Please do not hesitate to contact me by reply email if I
may be of further assistance.

I request that all costs for all aspects of the processing of this
request be waived on the grounds that the release of this
information is in the public interest.

Regards,

Culley Palmer

Link to this

Alex Sadleir left an annotation ()

Previously, the AFP was "unable to confirm or deny the existence" of documents about FinFisher https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/g...

Link to this

Culley Palmer left an annotation ()

Alex, that request was part of my inspiration for this one. I have never seen "cannot confirm or deny" anywhere else as a response to a FOI.
Thanks.

Link to this

From: foi
CrimTrac

UNCLASSIFIED

Dear Mr Palmer

 

I refer to your request for access to documents relating to Gamma
International’s FinFisher software under the Freedom of Information Act
1982 (Cth). I have taken your request to be for all corporate documents
authored by a CrimTrac official in 2013 or 2014 that refer to “Gamma
International” and “FinFisher”, excluding duplicates, drafts, personal
information or documents in the public domain.

 

We received your request on Saturday 7 February 2015 and the 30 day
statutory period for processing your request commenced from the day after
that date. You should therefore expect a decision from us by Tuesday 10
March 2015. The period of 30 days may be extended if we need to consult
third parties, impose a charge or for other reasons. We will advise you if
this happens.

You will be notified of any charges in relation to your request as soon as
possible, before we process any requested documents or impose a final
charge.

 

Please note that information released under the FOI Act may later be
published online on our [1]disclosure log, subject to certain exceptions.
(For example, personal information will not be published where this would
be unreasonable.)

 

We will contact you using the email address you provided. Please advise if
you would prefer us to use an alternative means of contact.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

FOI Coordinator

Legal and Commercial Directorate

CrimTrac Agency | Australian Government

e: [2][CrimTrac request email]

 

 

 

IMPORTANT: This email and any attachments remain the property of the
CrimTrac Agency and may contain confidential and or privileged
information. It is authorised for use by the intended recipient for the
purpose stated in the email and CrimTrac will not be held responsible for
any loss or action taken in reliance upon it. If you are not the intended
recipient, please delete this email and notify the sender immediately and
do not disseminate, distribute, copy or use its contents.

This email has been scanned for known computer viruses however the
CrimTrac Agency will not be held responsible for any damage which may
arise from opening the email or its attachments.

P Please consider the environment before printing this email. 

The CrimTrac Agency, GPO Box 1573 CANBERRA CITY ACT 2601

References

Visible links
1. http://www.crimtrac.gov.au/privacy/FOIDi...
2. mailto:[CrimTrac request email]

Link to this

From: Culley Palmer

Delivered

Dear CrimTrac,

Thank you for your email acknowledging my FOI request.

Would you please also acknowledge my request that the processing fees be waived on public interest grounds.

Regards,

Culley Palmer

Link to this

Culley Palmer left an annotation ()

I have made a similar request, on FinFisher, to DFAT:

https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/g...

Link to this

Ben Fairless left an annotation ()

You will normally get the opportunity to put a case forward for processing fees if the Agency determines that you are required to pay them.

I would wait and see if they respond with a decision to issue charges, and see if they give any reasons. You can then put forward a strong, specific case around **why** the requested information is in the public interest (you have the burden to prove it is, they don't!).

Link to this

From: foi
CrimTrac

UNCLASSIFIED
CrimTrac does not currently propose to issue a notice under section 29(1) of the FOI Act (that the applicant is liable to pay a charge) for this request. Therefore, there is no need to request a correction, reduction or waiver of a charge at this stage of the process.

If CrimTrac decides to issue a section 29(1) notice, you will be given 30 days to provide written reasons as to why the proposed charge should be waived on public interest grounds (as per section 29(5)(b)). If this were to happen, we will provide you with some guidance on framing your written submissions.

show quoted sections

Link to this

Culley Palmer left an annotation ()

Thanks Ben

Link to this

From: foi
CrimTrac


Attachment Decision letter to applicant.pdf
1.3M Download View as HTML


Unofficial

Dear Mr Palmer,

 

Please refer to the attached letter.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

FOI Coordinator

Legal and Commercial Directorate

CrimTrac Agency | Australian Government

e: [1][CrimTrac request email]

 

 

 

IMPORTANT: This email and any attachments remain the property of the
CrimTrac Agency and may contain confidential and or privileged
information. It is authorised for use by the intended recipient for the
purpose stated in the email and CrimTrac will not be held responsible for
any loss or action taken in reliance upon it. If you are not the intended
recipient, please delete this email and notify the sender immediately and
do not disseminate, distribute, copy or use its contents.

This email has been scanned for known computer viruses however the
CrimTrac Agency will not be held responsible for any damage which may
arise from opening the email or its attachments.

P Please consider the environment before printing this email. 

The CrimTrac Agency, GPO Box 1573 CANBERRA CITY ACT 2601

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[CrimTrac request email]

Link to this

From: Culley Palmer

Delivered

Dear CrimTrac,

Thank you for your email.

Thank you for conducting searches so promptly. I am satisfied with the outcome of this request.

Regards,

Culley Palmer

Link to this

Culley Palmer left an annotation ()

If I receive notification from a Department that they do not hold the records and are therefore refusing the request, should I mark the status as "they do not have the information" rather than "refused" ?

Thanks.

Link to this

Locutus Sum left an annotation ()

This is a very interesting and informative response. It is of very special interest because at the time when Mr Alex Sadleir made a similar request (https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/g... the CrimTrac agency replied by referring to section 25 of the Freedom of Information Act (http:///www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/... and to say that CrimTrac would not confirm nor deny the existence of any document relevant to the request.

In my mind the response to Mr Sadleir was technically deficient in several respects, and reviewable, but a person can see information in this response here that is much more useful!

Link to this

Culley Palmer left an annotation ()

I think the other request (by Henare Degan) to which you refer was made to the Australian Federal Police, not CrimTrac.

https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/g...

I have one on FinFisher to DFAT pending as well:

https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/g...

Not sure who to ask next...

Link to this

Ben Fairless left an annotation ()

You should mark a request how you felt it was handled. It's a bit weird legally, but the Department has to either Provide documents or refuse a request (at the end stage).

If you felt the Department hadn't conducted sufficent searches (and therefore refused the request because no documents could be found, but they hadn't, in your opinion, searched for them) I would personally call that refused. In this case, you were correct to mark the request as "Not Held"

Cheers,

Ben

Link to this

Ben Fairless left an annotation ()

When states are added to RTK (coming soon hopefully!) you'll have a few more places you can send your request :)

Link to this

Culley Palmer left an annotation ()

Thanks.

I'm looking forward to the addition of states.

I note that documents published by WikiLeaks show that NSW Police contracted Gamma International products through 2011-2012

https://wikileaks.org/spyfiles4/customer...

Link to this

Things to do with this request

Anyone:
CrimTrac only: