Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner
Province of British Columbia
Order No. 120-1996
August 30, 1996
INQUIRY RE: A request for records in the custody, or under the control, of
the British Columbia Council of Human Rights
Fourth Floor
1675 Douglas Street
Victoria, B.C. V8V 1X4
Telephone: 604-387-5629
Facsimile: 604-387-1696
Web Site: http//www.cafe.net/gvc/foi
1. Description of the review
As Information and Privacy Commissioner, I conducted a written inquiry at the
Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (the Office) on July 15,
1996 under section 56 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of
Privacy Act (the Act). This inquiry arose out of a request for review
submitted to this Office on April 4, 1996. On January 25, 1996 the applicant
requested from the British Columbia Council of Human Rights (the public body)
records concerning a decision involving the applicant.
On February 29, 1996 the Council disclosed 257 records, amounting to
1,082 pages, to the applicant. The Council severed a small amount of
personal information about third parties from four pages under section 22 of
the Act because, in the opinion of the Council, disclosure of the personal
information would be an unreasonable invasion of the personal privacy of the
third parties.
2. Documentation of the inquiry process
A Notice of Inquiry was issued to the parties on June 24, 1996. The inquiry
process began July 5, 1996 and concluded July 15, 1996. The applicant did not
make a primary submission; this is a critical consideration to which I will
return later in this
order.
3. The records in dispute
The records in dispute consist of three pages. Page 127 is a memorandum from
the Ministry of Labour, Employment Standards Branch, to the Council, dated June
24, 1993. Page 187 is a hand-written note dated "June 23." Page 189 is a
computer printout dated September 3, 1992.
4. Issue under review at the inquiry
The issue originally under review at this inquiry was whether the records in
dispute are protected from disclosure by section 22 of the Act.
5. Discussion
Under section 57(2) of the Act, the applicant bears the burden of proof to
establish that disclosure of the information sought would not be an
unreasonable invasion of the third parties' personal privacy. The applicant
was informed of this fact in a Notice of Inquiry sent to him on June 24,
1996.
The applicant's initial submission in this matter was due at my Office on July
5, 1996 and the Council's reply submission on July 12, 1996. As of July 15,
1996, I had not received any submissions from the applicant. I did forward the
reply submission of the Council to him. However, since the applicant had the
burden of proof and did not file a
submission, I decided under section 56(4)(b) of the Act that he was not
entitled to submit any material in response to the Council's representations.
I informed the applicant of that fact in writing on July 10, 1996.
The applicant stated that he had not received the Notice of Inquiry or the
Portfolio Officer's fact report. The Office sent these items to him by courier
service on June 25 and July 3, 1996. Although no one was at home at the time
of the deliveries, the courier delivery person confirmed that he left both
envelopes at the doorstep of the applicant, partly under the mat. I am
satisfied that reasonable efforts were made to deliver the documents to him.
The Council's submission in this inquiry was to the effect that its decision
on release of the records should be upheld, because of the applicant's failure
to discharge the burden of proof placed on him under the Act. (Submission of
the Council, paragraph 9) In support of its position, it cited, appropriately,
my Order No. 59-1995, October 25, 1995.
6.
Order
I find that the applicant in this case has failed to meet the burden of proof
imposed by section 57(2). Under section 58(2)(c) of the Act, I therefore
require the British Columbia Council of Human Rights to withhold the remaining
three pages of severed records.
August 30, 1996
David H. Flaherty
Commissioner