7 Apr 2021, 09:00

A man was imprisoned for indecent assault and child sexual exploitation relating to internet images and videos. Through his lawyer, he requested access to all records held by the Department of Corrections associated with psychological reports about him.

Corrections withheld some information from a report filed under the Parole Act 2002. It advised that the release of the redacted correspondence from the report would compromise its ability to administer a test used to assess the man’s risk to the public.

The Privacy Act

We studied the man’s complaint. It raised issues under section 27(1)(c) of the Privacy Act 1993 (section 53(c) of the Privacy Act 2020) which gives an agency the ability to refuse to disclose personal information if it would prejudice the maintenance of the law, including the prevention, investigation, and detection of offences and the right to a fair trial.

Corrections advised that the release of the unredacted correspondence would uncover the measures and methods used in the assessment tool, creating a risk that the individual could manipulate the process to their advantage in the future. However, it advised that individuals could request that their psychometric information be released to a psychologist provided the information used to score the test is not disclosed.

After reviewing the information, we found that section 27(1)(c) (section 53(c) of the Privacy Act 2020) did apply in the circumstances as it is important for Corrections to effectively screen applicants for parole for their risk to public safety. Giving individuals the opportunity to have their psychological information released to a psychologist was a reasonable compromise in the circumstances.

We informed the man and closed the file.