Previous FOI request in relation to States of Jersey Police (FOI)
Previous FOI request in relation to States of Jersey Police (FOI)Produced by the Freedom of Information office
Authored by States of Jersey and published on 30 November 2015.
Prepared internally, no external costs.
Under the Freedom of Information law I would like to request the following, in relation to a previous FOI request.
Thank you for your reply, is it possible to have the information requested but not received, what was the cause? Was he tried under common or statue law?
The SOJP/Honorary have a legal power to inspect a motor vehicle, do they have a lawfully power?
The SOJP have a "common law right to question anybody", do I have a common law right to remain silent?
The SOJP is "not a registered company", is it possible to have a reply in why I have found a credit report on "Dun and Bradstreet", which holds over 300 million company's? I include the link below:
Company lookup on Dun and Bradstreet website
The question does not make sense, imagine you order something at a restaurant, you have to pay because you have ordered it, can the same be said about a PC, if ordered by a PC can I charge them/the company? After all an order is chargeable?
The above questions state you answer, then followed by a further question or a question I asked but I believe was not answered, I have also included links to websites that support my claims/ questions.
I wish to thank you for your time, with good will and without being vexatious.
The States of Jersey Police note and accept that the requestor is not vexatious however; the Article 21 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law describes how a ‘request’ can be vexatious.
Article 21 (1) of the law states:
A scheduled Public Authority need not comply with a request for information if it considers the request to be vexatious.
It is the opinion of the States of Jersey police that the requestor has used a ‘Scattergun Approach’ to this request. It is completely random in nature and lacks any clear focus. The questions have been answered in the previous response yet the requestor is now using ‘Unreasonable Persistence’.
The requestor has made three previous requests within a month which ‘Overlap’ which is now causing a ‘Disproportionate Effort’ to respond to.
It is anticipated that any response given will not meet with the requestors requirements and is therefore now ‘Overly Burdensome’ to continue responding. The States of Jersey Police cannot be reasonably expected to continue replying to the same request.
The States of Jersey Police have declared this request as vexatious and will not enter into any further correspondence on this matter under the Freedom Of Information (Jersey) Law.