In a recent decision the Information Commissioner has decided that public interest reasons are not enough to justify the release of reports into human rights conditions at asylum seeker centres. Right to Know, an organisation that encourages freedom of information, sought reports into the human rights conditions at asylum seeker centres from the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC).
IHREC conducted several visits to accommodation centres for international protection applicants during a time where the accommodation system was under intense pressure following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. A previously released report detailed an “intense oppressive atmosphere” and poor conditions at a centre in City west, Dublin.
Following that report, Right to Know sought additional reports on additional visits, which IHREC did not respond to. Upon internal review IHREC refused the request for access to the reports. Right to Know appealed the decision to the Information Commissioner. IHREC justified their refusal by relying on Section 30 of the Freedom of Information Act, claiming that the information gathered during their visits was provided on the understanding that it would be kept confidential and that by breaching the confidentiality, the centres would be less likely to provide such information upon future visits.
Right to Know argued that the information had a great public interest aspect to it, to which the Information Commissioner accepted that while the report would add considerably to the public understanding of the standard of the facilities and services provided to the International protection Applicants, and the fact that these services were provided by the State gave great weight to the public interest in disclosing the records. It was not enough to outweigh IHREC’s ability to continue to properly observe the conditions in the centres.
It was ultimately decided to affirm the decision of IHREC to withhold the records claiming the public interest aspect did not justify the release of the reports.