The applicant says, "I believe my request to be a valid request that should not be overlooked because of a 'form'." But his belief is not informed by the law. The Right to Information Act 2009 (Qld) says at section 24(2)(a): "The application must— be in the approved form and be accompanied by the application fee."

In fact the RTI makes bigger demands than this but it is easiest to read the application form

Also, the application made by the applicant is an "informal request" as the officer explained. An informal request is not subject to internal review. If an applicant wants a review then she must make a formal application at the beginning because only a formal decision can be reviewed.

The Commonwealth Information Commissioner has previously explained that he believes that a decision by an officer than an application is invalid is, itself, an access refusal decision that can be reviewed. But even this is not binding on Commonwealth departments because only an AAT decision or court decision would be binding; and it is definitely not binding on the Queensland departments. Most likely it is not even relevant to Queensland departments although they might be interested in the arguments considered by the Australian Information Commissioner.

Conclusion: The request was not valid and has effectively been refused. The request for internal review was not valid and has effectively been refused. If the applicant wishes to pursue the information request she should make a formal application.

Dear Locotus Sum

I refer to the conclusion of your annotation as quoted below;
' If the applicant wishes to pursue the information request she should make a formal application'.

It is not clear as to why you refer to the applicant as being a 'she'.

Rather presumptuous inference you made, wouldnt you say?, not to mention, offensive and dishonest. Unless, of course you hold some knowledge or information to substantiate such comment.

If so, I would encourage you to share such information in your reply.

Appreciated

Sam

@Sam. In answer to your question, "No, I would not say". For me to use "she" is not dishonest. Dishonesty is more than a mistake or error. I am ignorant and frequently stupid but not dishonest. When I write my annotations, I never know the sex of the applicant because I cannot know if user name "Noah Jensen" is actually :Freja Pedersen". If I wish to refer to the applicant in the annotation I am allowed only to say "the applicant" , or "he" or "she" because I was taught that a singular subject ("the applicant") requires a singular pronoun. I think it would be very strange if I wrote "it". But my English is not perfect although it has become much better in the last 12 months. Also, I think it would be awkward to put "the applicant" in my annotation in every place where I used a pronoun.

In fact, sometimes I use "she" and sometimes use "he". You will see that although (I think) you are saying that you have been offended by "she" in the last paragraph of my annotation, I used also used "he" in the first paragraph! It is inconsistent, I agree. It is poor English. Some people would not like it, but I often mix the pronouns because I am ignorant. So it is not even presumptuous for me when I use "he" or "she". Sometimes I just make a change. Sometimes I use die-roll (1,2,3 it is "he", 3,4,5 it is "she").

I wish you success with your application if you choose to continue it.