Review of TPPA request ordered

TRADE Minister Tim Groser has been ordered to take a fresh look at a request for information on Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPPA) negotiations.

Professor Jane Kelsey and others took Groser to the High Court after he refused to release information to her under the Official Information Act. It later emerged that Groser had not reviewed the documents he refused to release, in a blanket refusal for information.

Yesterday Justice David Collins delivered a judgment in which he said there was ‘‘no lawful basis for the minister to withhold, in the way he did, some of the information requested by Professor Kelsey’’.

Collins added: ‘‘It is therefore appropriate for the minister to ensure officials assess each piece of information requested by Professor Kelsey that is in the possession of the minister and [Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade] MFAT against the criteria in the act for withholding information’’.

The decision fell short of a declaration that Groser or officials at MFAT acted illegally in the refusal.

Groser was, however, given blunt advice from the High Court, instructing him to review his decision ‘‘in a way that is consistent with his obligations under the Official Information Act’’. Officials will be required to review ‘‘each piece’’ of information requested.

Justice Collins also sounded a more general warning to the wider Government about the way it handles Official Information Act requests.

‘‘[T]he [Official Information] Act plays a significant role in New Zealand’s constitutional and democratic arrangements. It is essential the act’s meaning and purpose is fully honoured by those required to consider the release of official information,’’ he wrote.

‘‘[T]he orders I have made reinforce to the minister and other decision-makers the importance of discharging their responsibilities under the act and promote future compliance.’’

During the hearing in the High Court at Wellington on September 28, lawyers for the Crown argued that the request might force officials to look at 30,000 pages of information.

Kelsey said she had been vindicated. ‘‘The minister’s approach epitomises the contempt for democratic processes and accountability that has pervaded these negotiations,’’ she said.

However, she added that Groser’s tactic had been successful. Since the court heard Kelsey’s application, the 12 countries involved in the TPPA have announced an agreement, although the final text of the agreement has not yet been published.

‘‘It’s cold comfort that the minister will have to revisit the request, using a proper process and interpretation of the rules, after the negotiations have already concluded,’’ Kelsey said.

Greenpeace described the decision as a ‘‘humiliating judicial slapdown’’ while the Green Party said the Government ‘‘must change its arrogant approach to the public’s right to know about official information’’ in light of the decision.

However, one OIA expert said it may be that Groser’s office and MFAT officials had made a basic error in the way it handled the request.

Groser could simply have used section 18A of the act, which covers requests involving a substantial amount of collation and research, to request further time and possibly inform Kelsey that she would have to pay for the research to be undertaken.

Tim Groser