OFFICIAL
Our Ref: LEX 2871
26 July 2024
Sean (Right to know)
By Email:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Internal review of Freedom of Information decision – my ref LEX 2967
I refer to your email of 24 July 2024, seeking internal review of the AFP’s decision made on
23 July 2024 under
the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the Act). I am an officer authorised to make
internal review decisions under the Act.
BACKGROUND
On 28 June 2024, you sought access to the fol owing:
A list of any and al website domains seized either directly by or with assistance from the Australian
Federal Police between the years of 2008-2014
I would like to request that this list be provided in an easy to read format and include the following
information:
- Domain name
- Domain Registry
- Date of Seizure
- Brief description of the reason for the seizure.
Where possible and if al owed, please include any and al artwork, graphics, or seizure notices applied to
the domain once seized.
ORIGINAL DECISION
On 24 July 2024, an officer authorised to make decisions under the Act made a decision in the fol owing
terms:
SEARCHES
Searches for documents were undertaken by several AFP line areas, relevant to the scope of your
request which included, a search of all records held by those line areas within the AFP.
As a result, no documents relating to your request have been located in the possession of the Australian
Federal Police. By way of further explanation, the Act
provides for access to current documents in an
agency’s possession. There is no requirement for an agency to create a document for the purpose of
responding to an FOI request. The AFP’s Freedom of Information Team is therefore unable to provide you
with an “
A list of any and al website domains seized…”
Freedom of Information
/ GPO Box 401 Canberra City ACT 2601
/ Email: xxx@xxx.xxx.xx
POLICING FOR A SAFER AUSTRALIA
ABN 17 864 931 143
afp.gov.au
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
I consider al places where documents might be held were searched and the search terms were
comprehensive enough to locate any relevant documents.
I understand no documents relating to your request have been located in the possession of the AFP.
Accordingly, I am satisfied al reasonable searches have been conducted and the AFP does not have any
documents to produce in response to your request.
Section 24A states:
“An agency or Minister may refuse a request for access to a document if:
(a)
all reasonable steps have been taken to find the document; and
(b)
the agency or Minister is satisfied that the document:
(i)
is in the agency’s or Minister’s possession but cannot be found; or
(ii)
does not exist.”
INTERNAL REVIEW
Your request for internal review relevantly stated:
I would like to apologise for my delay in responding as I've recently been sick. I'd like to request a review
or request that the FOI officer search deeper for any information I have requested. I am wil ing to al ow
as much additional time as needed (within reason).
A cursory Google search produced dozens are official AFP articles that outline the agencies' actions in
either directly seizing domains or assisting in their seizure. I would like to point your attention to a news
update from last year where the AFP seized several domains from the Cook Islands and issued a take
down notice on their landing page.
(I also apologise for this example, it's relating to an operation to take down child abuse websites
however it is the first example I found after googling "AFP Website seizure" Therefore in my opinion, the
information must exist in some form)
DECISION
The Act provides for access to existing documents in an agency’s possession. Section 17 of the Act
relevantly provides:
(1) (a) where it appears from the request that the desire of the applicant is for information that is not
available in discrete form in written documents of the agency; and
… (c) the agency could produce a written document containing the information in discrete form by:
(i) the use of a computer or other equipment that is ordinarily available to the agency for
retrieving or col ating stored information; …;
the agency shal deal with the request as if it were a request for access to a written document so
produced and containing that information and, for that purpose, this Act applies as if the agency had
such a document in its possession.
(2) An agency is not required to comply with subsection (1) if compliance would substantial y and
unreasonably divert the resources of the agency from its other operations.
Having regard to the nature and scope of your request, and the nature of the AFP’s record holdings, it
is not possible to produce a written document containing the information you seek in discrete form by
the use of a computer or other equipment that is ordinarily available to the AFP for retrieving or
collating stored information.
Accordingly, compliance with section 17(1) would substantially and unreasonably divert the resources
of the AFP from its other operations.
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
Therefore, under section 17(2), I refuse access to the creation of a document as outlined in your
request. Alternatively, under section 24, I also refuse access on the ground that I am satisfied that the
document you request access to does not exist.
REVIEW RIGHTS
Under section 54L of the Act, you may apply to the Australian Information Commissioner to review my
decision. An application for review by the Information Commissioner must be made in writing within 60
days of the date of this letter, and be lodged in one of the fol owing ways:
Online:
https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-information/your-freedom-of-information-
rights/freedom-of-information-reviews/information-commissioner-review
Post:
Director of FOI Dispute Resolution
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5288
SYDNEY NSW 2001
Yours sincerely,
Adam Anastasi
Deputy General Counsel – Commercial, Governance and Information Law
Chief Counsel Portfolio
OFFICIAL
