Do police consider it illegal to link to material later classified as objectionable?
Roger Brown made this Official Information request to New Zealand Police
The request was partially successful.
      From: Roger Brown
      
    
    Dear New Zealand Police,
1a) Who recommended to Police that charges be laid against the 'Counterspin Media' cranks for posting a link to a website that allowed users who made the choice to access that website to play a video that was- days after the original post was made- classified as objectionable by the Office of Film and Literature Classification?
1b) Who recommended to Police that charges be laid against the 'Counterspin Media' cranks for posting a document that makes broadly similar claims to said video, which OFLC has confirmed is not, itself, classified as objectionable?
1c) Please provide all communications made within Police and with Crown Solicitors and other agencies, prior to laying these charges.
2a) The Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993 provides a very clear definition of the meaning of 'distribute' in the context of the offenses with which the cranks have been charged. It is very obvious that the act only covers the actual electronic transmission of objectionable publications, whether on its own (publishing/hosting objectionable publications yourself on your own website) or as part of a wider set of material (publishing/hosting a website which includes offensive material as a subset of the content of a web page, or embedded on such). Please provide any documents, inclusive but not limited to the 'Objectionable publications' part of the Police Manual, relevant to how Police reinterpret the Act in the context of publications on the World Wide Web.
2b) Do Police consider linking (providing an internet location that a user might choose to visit) to content that has been classified as objectionable to constitute 'distributing' objectionable publications?
2c) Do Police consider linking to web pages that include embedded links to content that has been classified as objectionable to constitute 'distributing' objectionable publications?
2d) Do Police consider linking to web pages that link to content that has been classified as objectionable to constitute 'distributing' objectionable publications?
2e) Do Police consider linking to web pages that include embedded links to content that is  classified as objectionable after the links are originally posted to constitute 'distributing' objectionable publications?
Kind regards,
Roger Brown
        From: Ministerial Services
        New Zealand Police
      
    
    Tēnā koe Roger 
I acknowledge receipt of your Official Information Act (OIA) request below, received by New Zealand Police on 10 September 2022. 
Your request is being actioned pursuant to the OIA. You can expect a response to your request on or before 7 October 2022. 
Kind regards, Dylan
Ministerial Services PNHQ
________________________________________
From: Roger Brown <[FOI #20508 email]>
Sent: 10 September 2022 12:52
To: Ministerial Services
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Official Information request - Do police consider it illegal to link to material later classified as objectionable?
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear New Zealand Police,
1a) Who recommended to Police that charges be laid against the 'Counterspin Media' cranks for posting a link to a website that allowed users who made the choice to access that website to play a video that was- days after the original post was made- classified as objectionable by the Office of Film and Literature Classification?
1b) Who recommended to Police that charges be laid against the 'Counterspin Media' cranks for posting a document that makes broadly similar claims to said video, which OFLC has confirmed is not, itself, classified as objectionable?
1c) Please provide all communications made within Police and with Crown Solicitors and other agencies, prior to laying these charges.
2a) The Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993 provides a very clear definition of the meaning of 'distribute' in the context of the offenses with which the cranks have been charged. It is very obvious that the act only covers the actual electronic transmission of objectionable publications, whether on its own (publishing/hosting objectionable publications yourself on your own website) or as part of a wider set of material (publishing/hosting a website which includes offensive material as a subset of the content of a web page, or embedded on such). Please provide any documents, inclusive but not limited to the 'Objectionable publications' part of the Police Manual, relevant to how Police reinterpret the Act in the context of publications on the World Wide Web.
2b) Do Police consider linking (providing an internet location that a user might choose to visit) to content that has been classified as objectionable to constitute 'distributing' objectionable publications?
2c) Do Police consider linking to web pages that include embedded links to content that has been classified as objectionable to constitute 'distributing' objectionable publications?
2d) Do Police consider linking to web pages that link to content that has been classified as objectionable to constitute 'distributing' objectionable publications?
2e) Do Police consider linking to web pages that include embedded links to content that is classified as objectionable after the links are originally posted to constitute 'distributing' objectionable publications?
Kind regards,
Roger Brown
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an Official Information request made via the FYI website.
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #20508 email]
Is [New Zealand Police request email] the wrong address for Official Information requests to New Zealand Police? If so, please contact us using this form:
https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers
If you find this service useful as an Official Information officer, please ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's OIA or LGOIMA page.
show quoted sections
        From: IR.Central
        New Zealand Police
      
    
    Tēnā koe Roger,
 
I acknowledge receipt of your request below, received by Police on
 10/09/2022.
 
Your reference number is IR-01-22-27618.
 
You will receive a response to your request on or before 07/10/2022 unless
 an extension is needed.
 
If you have any queries, please feel free to contact the IR team on
 [1][email address]
 
Ngā mihi,
Initial Assessor
Central Region Information Request Team
Service Delivery
[2][email address]
 
[3]wordmark transparent
 
 [4]rainbow icon [5][IMG][6][IMG][7][IMG][8][IMG]
 
 
 
===============================================================
WARNING
The information contained in this email message is intended for the
 addressee only and may contain privileged information. It may also be
 subject to the provisions of section 50 of the Policing Act 2008, which
 creates an offence to have unlawful possession of Police property. If you
 are not the intended recipient of this message or have received this
 message in error, you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy this
 message or any of its contents.
Also note, the views expressed in this message may not necessarily reflect
 those of the New Zealand Police. If you have received this message in
 error, please email or telephone the sender immediately
References
Visible links
 1. mailto:[email address]
 2. mailto:[email address]
 4. https://www.police.govt.nz/contact-us/lo...
 5. http://www.police.govt.nz/facebook
 6. http://www.police.govt.nz/twitter
 7. http://www.police.govt.nz/instagram
 8. https://www.youtube.com/user/policenz
        From: IR.Central
        New Zealand Police
      
    
    Tçnâ koe Roger,
 
I acknowledge receipt of your request received by Police on 10/09/2022.
 
Your reference number is IR-01-22-27618.
 
You will receive a response to your request on or before 07/10/2022 unless
 an extension is needed.
 
If you have any queries, please feel free to contact the IR team on
 [1][email address]
 
Ngâ mihi,
T Keene
Information Request Team – Central Region
 E  [2][email address]
 
[3]wordmark transparent
 
 
[4]rainbow icon [5][IMG][6][IMG][7][IMG][8][IMG]
 
 
 
 
 
 
===============================================================
WARNING
The information contained in this email message is intended for the
 addressee only and may contain privileged information. It may also be
 subject to the provisions of section 50 of the Policing Act 2008, which
 creates an offence to have unlawful possession of Police property. If you
 are not the intended recipient of this message or have received this
 message in error, you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy this
 message or any of its contents.
Also note, the views expressed in this message may not necessarily reflect
 those of the New Zealand Police. If you have received this message in
 error, please email or telephone the sender immediately
References
Visible links
 1. mailto:[email address]
 2. mailto:[email address]
 4. https://www.police.govt.nz/contact-us/lo...
 5. http://www.police.govt.nz/facebook
 6. http://www.police.govt.nz/twitter
 7. http://www.police.govt.nz/instagram
 8. https://www.youtube.com/user/policenz
        From: Ministerial Services
        New Zealand Police
      
    
    Tēnā koe Roger
 
I refer to your request of 10 September 2022 for the following
 information:
 
1a) Who recommended to Police that charges be laid against the 'Counter
 spin Media' cranks for posting a link to a website that allowed users who
 made the choice to access that website to play a video that was- days
 after the original post was made- classified as objectionable by the
 Office of Film and Literature Classification?
1b) Who recommended to Police that charges be laid against the 'Counter
 spin Media' cranks for posting a document that makes broadly similar
 claims to said video, which OFLC has confirmed is not, itself, classified
 as objectionable?
1c) Please provide all communications made within Police and with Crown
 Solicitors and other agencies, priorto laying these charges.
2a) The Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993 provides a
 very clear definition of the meaning of 'distribute' in the context of the
 offenses with which the cranks have been charged. It is very obvious that
 the act only covers the actual electronic transmission of objectionable
 publications, whether on its own(publishing/hosting objectionable
 publications yourself on your own website) or as part of a wider set of
 material (publishing/hosting a website which includes offensive material
 as a subset of the content of a webpage, or embedded on such). Please
 provide any documents, inclusive but not limited to the 'Objectionable
 publications' part of the Police Manual, relevant to how Police
 reinterpret the Act in the context of publications on the World Wide Web.
2b) Do Police consider linking (providing an internet location that a user
 might choose to visit) to content that has been classified as
 objectionable to constitute 'distributing' objectionable publications?
2c) Do Police consider linking to web pages that include embedded links to
 content that has been classified as objectionable to constitute
 'distributing' objectionable publications?
2d) Do Police consider linking to web pages that link to content that has
 been classified as objectionable to constitute 'distributing'
 objectionable publications?
2e) Do Police consider linking to web pages that include embedded links to
 content that is classified as objectionable after
 
Unfortunately we were not be able to meet the due date of 7 October 2022.
 
I can confirm that your request has been compiled and is currently
 progressing through the end portion of our internal consultation process.
 Although I am unable to confirm a release date at this stage, I expect you
 will receive a response within three working days.
Please accept our apologies for the delay in providing you with a response
 to your query. We are endeavouring to provide this to you as soon as
 possible.
 
 
Ngā mihi
 
Julián (he/him)
Ministerial Services Advisor
 NZ Police National Headquarters Wellington
 If you’re wondering about the use of pronouns in email signatures, you can
 find [1]more information [2]here about how sharing pronouns can help
 create a sense of belonging and respect.
[3]wordmark transparent                   
 
===============================================================
WARNING
The information contained in this email message is intended for the
 addressee only and may contain privileged information. It may also be
 subject to the provisions of section 50 of the Policing Act 2008, which
 creates an offence to have unlawful possession of Police property. If you
 are not the intended recipient of this message or have received this
 message in error, you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy this
 message or any of its contents.
Also note, the views expressed in this message may not necessarily reflect
 those of the New Zealand Police. If you have received this message in
 error, please email or telephone the sender immediately
References
Visible links
 1. https://ssc.govt.nz/our-work/diversity-a...
 2. https://www.publicservice.govt.nz/our-wo...
        From: IR.Central
        New Zealand Police
      
    
    Good Afternoon Roger,
 
Please find attached our response to your request.
 
Your request is now closed.
 
Kind Regards
 
 
T Keene
Information Request Team – Central Region
 E  [1][email address]
 
[2]wordmark transparent
 
 
[3]rainbow icon [4][IMG][5][IMG][6][IMG][7][IMG]
 
 
===============================================================
WARNING
The information contained in this email message is intended for the
 addressee only and may contain privileged information. It may also be
 subject to the provisions of section 50 of the Policing Act 2008, which
 creates an offence to have unlawful possession of Police property. If you
 are not the intended recipient of this message or have received this
 message in error, you must not peruse, use, distribute or copy this
 message or any of its contents.
Also note, the views expressed in this message may not necessarily reflect
 those of the New Zealand Police. If you have received this message in
 error, please email or telephone the sender immediately
References
Visible links
 1. mailto:[email address]
 3. https://www.police.govt.nz/contact-us/lo...
 4. http://www.police.govt.nz/facebook
 5. http://www.police.govt.nz/twitter
 6. http://www.police.govt.nz/instagram
 7. https://www.youtube.com/user/policenz
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
 - Download a zip file of all correspondence (note: this contains the same information already available above).
 


Brooke Hart left an annotation ()
I see NZ Police have withheld several sections of the "Objectionable publications" Police Manual chapter they released to you, having asserted that withholding this information is necessary because "the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the maintenance of the law."
The Ombudsman's guidance on decisions to withhold information under section 6 of the Official Information Act 1982 is clear:
"It is not sufficient to simply assert that disclosure of the information will have a prejudicial effect. The public sector agency must be able to identify, with sufficient particularity, the nature of the prejudicial effect and explain how such prejudice will occur in order to meet the tests for withholding in section 6."
"The phrase "would be likely" requires more than mere possibility that disclosure may have a prejudicial effect. The Court of Appeal has interpreted the phrase "would be likely" to mean "a serious or real and substantial risk to a protected interest, a risk that might well eventuate”."
https://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/reso...
For the past several months, I have been collating Police Manual chapters that have been released by NZ Police. In this work I have seen several instances in which NZ Police have released a document twice, once with significant information withheld under section 6(c) of the OIA and once with that information released. In each case, I could see no clear way in which the release of this information could possibly be likely to prejudice the maintenance of the law.
I recommend you complain to the Ombudsman about NZ Police's decision to withhold information under section 6(c) of the OIA in response to your request. The Ombudsman will be able to view the information in order to form an opinion on whether or not NZ Police's decision was reasonable, and may recommend that NZ Police reconsider its response and release some or all of the withheld information.
Link to this