Mandatory protection of safety of individuals, and protection of property
The information officer of a public body— (a) must refuse a request for access to a record of the body if its disclosure could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of an individual; or (b) may refuse a request for access to a record of the body if its disclosure would be likely to prejudice or impair— (i) the security of— (aa) a building, structure or system, including, but not limited to, a computer or communication system; (bb) a means of transport; or (cc) any other property; or (ii) methods, systems, plans or procedures for the protection of— (aa) an individual in accordance with a witness protection scheme; (bb) the safety of the public, or any part of the public; or (cc) the security of property contemplated in subparagraph (i)(aa), (bb) or (cc).
What this means in practice
- Life or physical safety is a mandatory refusal; the security of buildings, systems, transport and witness-protection methods is discretionary — the public-body twin of s.66.
- The split matters: 'could endanger life' must be refused; 'would likely prejudice security' may be.
PopiGuard helps separate the mandatory life-safety refusal from the discretionary security one and record the basis.