Our reference: CB 25-163
Ryan J. Austin
Email by: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Dear Mr Austin
Decision on your Freedom of Information Request
On 2 November 2024, you submitted a request to the Classification Board (the Board), seeking access to
documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act).
1
Your request
You requested access to:
Al documents relating to the classification of the film 'Devilman Crybaby: Season 1':
- Classification Date: 12 January 2018
- File Number: T18/0166
- Classification Number: 277868
2
Authority to make decision
I am authorised to make decisions in relation to Freedom of Information requests under section 23(1) of the
FOI Act.
3
Decision
I have identified 9 documents that I consider contain information that is relevant to your request. These
documents were in the possession of the Board when your request was received.
I have decided to:
• grant access in ful to relevant information in three documents
• grant partial access to one document
I have also decided that five documents could reasonably be regarded as being irrelevant to your request as
they consist of correspondence sent directly to or from you and are therefore documents already in your
possession.
A schedule setting out the documents relevant to your request, with my decision in relation to these
documents, is at ATTACHMENT A.
4
Finding of facts and reasons for decision
My findings of fact and reasons for deciding that exemptions apply to parts of documents relevant to your
request are set out below.
4.1 Section 47F – Documents affecting personal privacy
Section 47F of the FOI Act provides that a document is conditional y exempt if its disclosure would involve
the unreasonable disclosure of personal information about any person (including a deceased person).
Personal Information
Personal information has the same meaning as in the Privacy Act. Specifical y, section 6 of the Privacy Act
provides that personal information means information or an opinion about an identified individual, or an
individual who is reasonably identifiable whether the information or opinion is true or not; and whether the
information or opinion is recorded in a material form or not.
Paragraph 6.126 of the FOI Guidelines states that for particular information to be personal information, an
individual must be identified or reasonably identifiable.
Paragraph 6.125 of the FOI Guidelines states that personal information can include a person’s name, address,
telephone number, date of birth, medical records, bank account details, taxation information and signature.
An individual is a natural person rather than a corporation, trust, body politic or incorporated association.
I am satisfied that parts of the documents marked ‘s47F’ include personal information about a number of
individuals.
Unreasonable Disclosure of Personal Information
Section 47F(2) of the FOI Act provides that, in determining whether the disclosure would involve the
unreasonable disclosure of personal information, I must have regard to the fol owing matters:
(a) the extent to which the information is wel known
(b) whether the person to whom the information relates is known to be (or to have been) associated
with the matters dealt with in the document
(c)
the availability of the information from publicly accessible sources
(d) any other matters that the agency or Minister considers relevant.
Paragraph 6.133 of the FOI Guidelines states that:
The personal privacy conditional exemption is designed to prevent the unreasonable invasion of third
parties’ privacy. The test of ‘unreasonableness’ implies a need to balance the public interest in
disclosure of government-held information and the private interest in the privacy of individuals. The
test does not, however, amount to the public interest test of s 11A(5), which fol ows later in the
decision making process. It is possible that the decision maker may need to consider one or more
factors twice, once to determine if a projected effect is unreasonable and again when assessing the
public interest balance.
Page 2 of 8
I note that the AAT, in Re Chandra and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs [1984] AATA 437 at
paragraph 259, stated that:
... whether a disclosure is ‘unreasonable’ requires … a consideration of al the circumstances, including
the nature of the information that would be disclosed, the circumstances in which the information was
obtained, the likelihood of the information being information that the person concerned would not
wish to have disclosed without consent, and whether the information has any current relevance … it
is also necessary in my view to take into consideration the public interest recognised by the Act in the
disclosure of information … and to weigh that interest in the balance against the public interest in
protecting the personal privacy of a third party ...
Paragraphs 6.137-6.139 of the FOI Guidelines state:
6.137
Key factors for determining whether disclosure is unreasonable include:
the author of the document is identifiable
the documents contain third party personal information
release of the documents would cause stress on the third party
no public purpose would be achieved through release
6.138
As discussed in the IC review decision of ‘FG’ and National Archives of Australia [2015]
AICmr 26, other factors considered to be relevant include:
the nature, age and current relevance of the information
any detriment that disclosure may cause to the person to whom the information relates
any opposition to disclosure expressed or likely to be held by that person
the circumstances of an agency’s col ection and use of the information
the fact that the FOI Act does not control or restrict any subsequent use or dissemination
of information released under the FOI Act
any submission an FOI applicant chooses to make in support of their application as to
their reasons for seeking access and their intended or likely use or dissemination of the
information, and
whether disclosure of the information might advance the public interest in government
transparency and integrity
6.139
The leading IC review decision on s 47F is ‘BA’ and Merit Protection Commissioner in which
the Information Commissioner explained that the object of the FOI Act to promote
transparency in government processes and activities needs to be balanced with the purpose
of s 47F to protect personal privacy.
I am satisfied that the disclosure of personal information contained within the documents would, in the
circumstances, constitute an unreasonable disclosure of personal information for the fol owing reasons:
• the conditional y exempt personal information is not wel known
• the person to whom the personal information relates is not known to be (or to have been)
associated with the matters dealt with in the document
• the conditional y exempt personal information is not available from publicly accessible sources
• the individuals whose personal information is contained in the documents is identifiable
• release of this information would cause stress to the individuals concerned
Page 3 of 8
• no further public purpose would be achieved through the release of the personal information
noting that the personal information is included in the document as a result of their employment
circumstance
• the information is current and has not lost its sensitivity through the passage of time
• the individuals would not expect the information to be placed in the public domain, and detriment
may be caused to the individuals to whom the information relates, and
• the FOI Act does not control or restrict any subsequent use or dissemination of information
released under the FOI Act.
I have consulted with affected third parties regarding the disclosure of their personal information, and I have
considered any concerns raised by those individuals during the course of making my decision.
For the reasons outlined above, I decided that parts of the documents marked ‘s47F’ are conditional y exempt
from disclosure under section 47F of the FOI Act.
Where information is found to be conditional y exempt, I must give access to that information unless access
at this time would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest. I have addressed the public interest
considerations below.
4.2 Public interest considerations
Pursuant to section 11A(5) of the FOI Act, I must give access to conditional y exempt information unless
access to that information at that time would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest. I have therefore
considered whether disclosure of the conditional y exempt information would be contrary to the public
interest.
I note that paragraph 6.224 of the FOI Guidelines states that the public interest test is considered to be:
• something that is of serious concern or benefit to the public, not merely of individual interest
• not something of interest to the public, but in the interest of the public
• not a static concept, where it lies in a particular matter wil often depend on a balancing of interests
• necessarily broad and non-specific and
• relates to matters of common concern or relevance to al members of the public, or a substantial
section of the public.
Factors favouring disclosure
Having regard to section 11B of the FOI Act, which provides the factors favouring access to conditional y
exempt information in the public interest, I consider that disclosure of the conditional y exempt information
at this time:
1)
would provide access to documents held by an agency of the Commonwealth, which would
promote the objects of the FOI Act by providing the Australian community with access to
information held by the Australian Government
o I note that paragraph 6.230 of the FOI Guidelines suggests it would be a rare case in which
disclosure would not promote the objects of the FOI Act, including by increasing scrutiny,
discussion, comment and review of the government’s activities.
2)
would not inform debate on a matter of public importance
3)
would not promote effective oversight of public expenditure
4)
would not al ow you access to your own personal information.
Page 4 of 8
o I note you are not seeking access to your own personal information and this factor is mute in
my considerations.
Factors weighing against disclosure
I consider that the fol owing factors weigh against disclosure of the conditional y exempt information at this
time, on the basis that disclosure:
1)
could reasonably be expected to prejudice the protection of a number of individuals’ right to
personal privacy
o The Board is committed to complying with its obligations under the Privacy Act 1988, which
sets out standards and obligations that regulate how we must handle and manage personal
information. I consider it is firmly in the public interest that we uphold the rights of
individuals to their own privacy and meet our statutory obligations under the Privacy Act.
o I note that the substance of the information that is relevant to your request has been
released to you and disclosure of the conditional y exempt personal information would not
provide you with any further insight into the workings of government beyond that
substantive information.
In making my decision, I have not taken into account any of the irrelevant factors set out in section 11B(4) of
the FOI Act.
Conclusion – disclosure is not in the public interest
For the reasons set out above, after weighing al public interest factors for and against disclosure, I decided
that, on balance, disclosure of the conditional y exempt information would be contrary to the public interest.
I am satisfied that the benefit to the public resulting from disclosure of the conditional y exempt information
is outweighed by the benefit to the public of withholding that information.
4.3 Section 22 – deletion of material from documents released to you
Section 22 of the FOI Act applies to documents containing irrelevant and/or exempt material and al ows an
agency to delete such material from a document.
Exempt material
As I decided that some information you have requested is exempt from disclosure, I have prepared an edited
copy of the documents released to you by deleting the exempt information under section 22(1)(a)(i) of the
FOI Act.
Irrelevant material
I decided that the documents captured by your request contain material which can reasonably be regarded
as irrelevant to your request. A number of documents captured by this request consist of correspondence to
or from you. When your request was acknowledged, we indicated that any documents already in your
possession would be regarded as irrelevant to the request unless you advised us otherwise. On the basis that
you did not notify us otherwise, I consider any correspondence sent directly to or from you to be irrelevant
to your request.
The documents also contain personal identifiers of public servants. When your request was acknowledged,
we notified you that personal information of public servants below the SES level and al email addresses,
signatures and direct telephone numbers would be considered irrelevant to the scope of your request unless
you told us that you were expressly seeking access to that information. On the basis that you did not notify
us otherwise, I decided this information is irrelevant to your request.
Page 5 of 8
As such, an edited copy of the documents has been prepared in accordance with section 22(1)(a)(i ) of the
FOI Act. This information is marked ‘s22’ in the documents released to you.
5
Material taken into consideration
In making my decision, I had regard to the fol owing:
• the terms of your request
• the content of the documents captured by your request
• the provisions of the FOI Act
• the guidelines issued by the Australian Information Commissioner under section 93A of the FOI Act
(the FOI Guidelines)
• advice from departmental officers with responsibility for the subject matter contained in the
documents captured by your request
• submissions from third parties consulted about documents which contain information concerning
them
6
Legislative provisions
The FOI Act, including the provisions referred to in my decision, are available on the Federal Register of
Legislation website: www.legislation.gov.au/Series/C2004A02562.
7
Your review rights
If you are dissatisfied with my decision, you may apply for a review of it.
7.1 Information Commissioner review or complaint
An application for IC review must be made in writing to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
(OAIC) within 60 days of the decision.
If you are not satisfied with the way we have handled your FOI request, you can lodge a complaint with the
OAIC. However, the OAIC suggests that complaints are made to the agency in the first instance.
More information about the Information Commissioner reviews and complaints is available on the OAIC
website here: www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-information/foi-review-process.
8
Publication of material released under the FOI Act
Where I have decided to release documents to you, we may also publish the released material on our
Disclosure Log. We wil not publish personal or business affairs information where it would be unreasonable
to do so.
For your reference our Disclosure Log can be found here: www.infrastructure.gov.au/about-us/freedom-
information/freedom-information-disclosure-log.
Page 6 of 8
Further information
The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts provides
administrative assistance to the Classification Board in relation to FOI matters.
If you require further information regarding this decision, please contact the Department’s FOI Section
at xxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx.
Yours sincerely
Steven Thomson
Director
Classification Board
Date: 13 December 2024
Page 7 of 8
