Law pertaining to identification

:Deborah-joy: of the Longstaff family made this Official Information request to Ministry of Justice

Ministry of Justice did not have the information requested.

From: :Deborah-joy: of the Longstaff family

Dear Ministry of Justice,

Would I be breaking the law by asking a policy enforcement office trading as "New Zealand Police" for proof of his / her name ie photographic evidence?

Please evidence the appropriate legislative evidence that supports a "yes" reply.

Yours faithfully,

:Deborah-joy: of the Longstaff family

Link to this

From: OIA@justice.govt.nz
Ministry of Justice

Kia ora,

Thank you for contacting the Official Information Act request mailbox for
the Ministry of Justice. 

We will endeavour to acknowledge your email within 2 working days.

You can find more information about how we can help you at our [1]Official
Information Act Requests page.

Please note that by law, when you ask for official information we have to
respond to your request as soon as reasonably practicable and no later
than 20 working days after we receive it.

 

The Ministry of Justice may publish the response to your request on our
website, you can expect that if your OIA is to be published that this will
take place at least 10 working days after it has been sent you. Your name
and any other personal information will be withheld under Section 9(2)(a)
(protect the privacy of natural persons).

 

Please send any non-OIA related emails through to
o[2][email address] and any complaints through
to [3][email address]

Ngā mihi,

Ministerial Relations and Services

Governance and Assurance

DDI: +64 4 918 8800

Justice Centre I Aitken Street

DX Box SX 10088 I Wellington

[4]www.justice.govt.nz

References

Visible links
1. https://www.justice.govt.nz/about/offici...
https://www.justice.govt.nz/about/offici...
2. mailto:[email address]
mailto:[email address]
3. mailto:[email address]
mailto:[email address]
4. http://www.justice.govt.nz/

Link to this

From: Media
Ministry of Justice


Attachment image001.jpg
15K Download


Kia ora Deborah-Joy

 

Thank you for your email of 17 October 2023 requesting, under the Official
Information Act 1982, information (outlined below) from the Ministry of
Justice.

 

While the Act allows New Zealanders to ask Ministers and government
agencies for information, there is no requirement to create new
information, compile information they do not hold, provide legal advice or
prove an opinion or, as in this case, respond to hypothetical questions.
Your questions designed to engage in a debate about sovereignty and the
role and powers of the Police rather than a request for official
information. The Act does not support requests where an opinion, comment,
argument, or hypothetical statement is put to a Minister or agency for
response, couched as a request for information. I am therefore refusing
your request under section 18(g) of the Act on the grounds that the
information sought is not held by the Ministry and there is no reason to
believe it is held by any other agency subject to the Act.

 

If you want information about Police powers, you may want to consult the
Policing Act 2008, which is available at:
[1]www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2008/0072/latest/DLM1102125.html

 

Alternatively, you may want to talk to a lawyer to gain independent legal
advice.  Free legal information and/or advice may be available from your
local community law centre at [2]www.communitylaw.org.nz

 

You have the right under section 28(3) of the Act to complain to the
Office of the Ombudsman if you are not satisfied with my response. The
Ombudsman may be contacted by email at: [3][email address
or by calling 0800 802 602.

 

Thanks,

 

Media Team

Ministry of Justice | Tāhū o te Ture

[4]justice.govt.nz

P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

 

 

References

Visible links
1. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/publi...
2. http://www.communitylaw.org.nz/
3. mailto:[email address]
4. http://www.justice.govt.nz/

Link to this

From: :Deborah-joy: of the Longstaff family

Dear Media,

A]. Who is "Media Team"? I legitimately and respectfully request to have the name of a human being to communicate with given that My OIA was not address to "Media Team"

B]. Insult 1]. You insult me by not using the name that was supplied to the Ministry of Justice, it is :Deborah-joy: of the Longstaff family NOT Deborah-Joy.

C]. Insult 2]. I did not ask for "legal advice", I know exactly who to approach for legal advice.

D]. Insult 3]. My question was not hypothetical, I asked it based on previous experiences I have had with NZ policy enforcement officers.

E]. Insult 4]. You were asked to provide any links to appropriate legislation pertaining to a "law" that I have been accused of breaking. You failed to do so given your assumption that this was a "hypothetical question".

F]. I asked the Ministry of Justice ONE simple question, not questions ...... Can you not count?

G]. Where does as ONE simple question amount to your interpretation that "Your questions designed to engage in debate about sovereignty".

H]. Your attempts to ridicule and gaslight me are duly noted, as is your attempt to deflect my simple question. This could be considered as obstruction of my access to transparency and factual evidence that I believe that the Ministry of Justice will have access to. In deciding not to answer my ONE simple question leads me to believe that there is no law which pertains to my question which was: "Would I be breaking the law by asking a policy enforcement officer trading as "New Zealand Police" for proof of his / her name ie photographic evidence?".

I]. My time is as valuable as yours "Media team", your interpretation of my legitimate requests for information appear to be biased. So as not to trouble you further, perhaps you could help me to construct this question so that it is not deemed as "hypothetical" or interpreted as "designed to engage in debate about sovereignty" or will your arrogance and ego prevent you from assisting an individual whose taxes contribute to your salary and pension?

J]. If you are unable to transparently and lawfully answer my simple initial question which was: "Would I be breaking the law by asking a policy enforcement officer trading as "New Zealand Police" for proof of his / her name ie photographic evidence"; as a tax payer funded department you are required to forward this request for an answer / information to the relevant human being who can answer this request, and who is duly instructed to provide me with his / her full name and contact details.

K]. You advise that "there is no reason to believe that it is held by any other agency subject to the Act". I have no evidence of that and therefore respectfully and legitimately instruct you to send my original question and request for the appropriate legislation to the following human beings:
The previous and / or current Minister of Justice, The Governor General, the Attorney-General, the Solicitor-General, the Minister for Police.

L]. You are also legitimately and respectfully requested to confirm and provide that evidence that you have in fact forwarded my questions / request for evidence to the above individuals in K]. by 30 October 2023.

M]. Should you fail to answer my simple question, and provide me with the appropriate legislation that supports this, I will have no option but to take this contempt for me asking a simple question as a tax payer further.

Sincerely,

:Deborah-joy: of the Longstaff family. [RD].

Link to this

From: Media
Ministry of Justice

Kia ora Deborah-joy: of the Longstaff family,

Thank you for your follow up questions and statements to the response from the Ministry of Justice for your request for official information.

The Media Team are the part to the Ministry that handles inquiries from the media, including the FYI website. Inadvertently, my signature was removed from the response before it was sent.

Turning to the rest of your questions and statements, as the Ministry has advised, the Official Information Act 1982 (the Act) is a means to allow New Zealanders to ask Ministers and government agencies for information they hold. There is no requirement under the Act for agencies to provide or prove an opinion, respond to hypothetical questions or provide legal advice. The Act does not support requests where statements are put to agencies for response couched as a request for official information. It is also not a vehicle to engage in a debate about issues with agencies. The Ministry therefore has nothing further to add to its response.

As previously advised, you have the right under section 28 of the Act to seek a review of the Ministry's handling of your request from the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman can be contacted at: www.ombudsman.parliament.nz

Kind regards

Antony Paltridge
Team Leader, Ministerial Relations and Services Ministry of Justice

-----Original Message-----
From: :Deborah-joy: of the Longstaff family <[FOI #24463 email]>
Sent: Wednesday, 18 October 2023 6:19 pm
To: Media <[email address]>
Subject: Re: OIA 107825

Dear Media,

A]. Who is "Media Team"? I legitimately and respectfully request to have the name of a human being to communicate with given that My OIA was not address to "Media Team"

B]. Insult 1]. You insult me by not using the name that was supplied to the Ministry of Justice, it is :Deborah-joy: of the Longstaff family NOT Deborah-Joy.

C]. Insult 2]. I did not ask for "legal advice", I know exactly who to approach for legal advice.

D]. Insult 3]. My question was not hypothetical, I asked it based on previous experiences I have had with NZ policy enforcement officers.

E]. Insult 4]. You were asked to provide any links to appropriate legislation pertaining to a "law" that I have been accused of breaking. You failed to do so given your assumption that this was a "hypothetical question".

F]. I asked the Ministry of Justice ONE simple question, not questions ...... Can you not count?

G]. Where does as ONE simple question amount to your interpretation that "Your questions designed to engage in debate about sovereignty".

H]. Your attempts to ridicule and gaslight me are duly noted, as is your attempt to deflect my simple question. This could be considered as obstruction of my access to transparency and factual evidence that I believe that the Ministry of Justice will have access to. In deciding not to answer my ONE simple question leads me to believe that there is no law which pertains to my question which was: "Would I be breaking the law by asking a policy enforcement officer trading as "New Zealand Police" for proof of his / her name ie photographic evidence?".

I]. My time is as valuable as yours "Media team", your interpretation of my legitimate requests for information appear to be biased. So as not to trouble you further, perhaps you could help me to construct this question so that it is not deemed as "hypothetical" or interpreted as "designed to engage in debate about sovereignty" or will your arrogance and ego prevent you from assisting an individual whose taxes contribute to your salary and pension?

J]. If you are unable to transparently and lawfully answer my simple initial question which was: "Would I be breaking the law by asking a policy enforcement officer trading as "New Zealand Police" for proof of his / her name ie photographic evidence"; as a tax payer funded department you are required to forward this request for an answer / information to the relevant human being who can answer this request, and who is duly instructed to provide me with his / her full name and contact details.

K]. You advise that "there is no reason to believe that it is held by any other agency subject to the Act". I have no evidence of that and therefore respectfully and legitimately instruct you to send my original question and request for the appropriate legislation to the following human beings:
The previous and / or current Minister of Justice, The Governor General, the Attorney-General, the Solicitor-General, the Minister for Police.

L]. You are also legitimately and respectfully requested to confirm and provide that evidence that you have in fact forwarded my questions / request for evidence to the above individuals in K]. by 30 October 2023.

M]. Should you fail to answer my simple question, and provide me with the appropriate legislation that supports this, I will have no option but to take this contempt for me asking a simple question as a tax payer further.

Sincerely,

:Deborah-joy: of the Longstaff family. [RD].

-----Original Message-----

Kia ora Deborah-Joy

 

Thank you for your email of 17 October 2023 requesting, under the Official Information Act 1982, information (outlined below) from the Ministry of Justice.

 

While the Act allows New Zealanders to ask Ministers and government agencies for information, there is no requirement to create new information, compile information they do not hold, provide legal advice or prove an opinion or, as in this case, respond to hypothetical questions.
Your questions designed to engage in a debate about sovereignty and the role and powers of the Police rather than a request for official information. The Act does not support requests where an opinion, comment, argument, or hypothetical statement is put to a Minister or agency for response, couched as a request for information. I am therefore refusing your request under section 18(g) of the Act on the grounds that the information sought is not held by the Ministry and there is no reason to believe it is held by any other agency subject to the Act.

 

If you want information about Police powers, you may want to consult the Policing Act 2008, which is available at:
[1]www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2008/0072/latest/DLM1102125.html

 

Alternatively, you may want to talk to a lawyer to gain independent legal advice.  Free legal information and/or advice may be available from your local community law centre at [2]www.communitylaw.org.nz

 

You have the right under section 28(3) of the Act to complain to the Office of the Ombudsman if you are not satisfied with my response. The Ombudsman may be contacted by email at: [3][email address] or by calling 0800 802 602.

 

Thanks,

 

Media Team

Ministry of Justice | Tāhū o te Ture

[4]justice.govt.nz

P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

 

 

References

Visible links
1. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/publi...
2. http://www.communitylaw.org.nz/
3. mailto:[email address]
4. http://www.justice.govt.nz/

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #24463 email]

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.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

hide quoted sections

Link to this

From: :Deborah-joy: of the Longstaff family

Dear Ministry of Justice team

I would like to re-word my initial request for information as follows:

Please advise, with the relevant sections of any legislation provided: Is a member of the public committing an offence by asking a policy enforcement officer wearing any type of uniform when they demand that uniformed individual to prove their ID (eg show warrant card, photo IDs name badges etc) ie Is there any law which prohibits such a demand of any policy enforcement officer? eg police, border staff, court officials, traffic wardens, bailiffs, airline security staff, bank security staff given that there are (a) numerous provable events regarding enforcement imposters & (b) published official information regarding personal safety & asking for proof of ID,

Yours sincerely,

:Deborah-joy: of the Longstaff family

Link to this

Things to do with this request

Anyone:
Ministry of Justice only: