OPEN LETTER TO THE RT HON SHABANA MAHMOOD KC MP

Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor

RE: Institutional Abuse of Section 14(1) FOIA and the Dransfield Precedent

Dear Lord Chancellor,

On the occasion of your recent appointment as Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor, I write to you in my capacity as a long-standing Freedom of Information (FOI) campaigner and whistleblower.

You may be unaware that a dangerous legal precedent has been embedded in the heart of our FOI system since 2013—namely, the Dransfield v Information Commissioner [2012] UKUT 440 (AAC) decision, which has led to the industrial-scale abuse of Section 14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). This ruling, upheld by the Court of Appeal, created a vague and subjective threshold for labelling FOI requests as “vexatious.” The result has been devastating: legitimate requests in the public interest—on issues including school safety, toxic air, nuclear regulation, water quality, and government accountability—are now routinely shut down under the guise of being ‘vexatious.’

I am the applicant behind the Dransfield case, and I write to you not out of self-interest, but in defence of the rule of law and the democratic principle that public information belongs to the public.

For over a decade, I have gathered hundreds of examples showing how the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has become not a neutral arbiter, but an active enabler in shielding public authorities from scrutiny. I now strongly believe that the ICO has been coaching public authorities in the use of the Dransfield precedent to deny access to information—especially in politically or commercially sensitive cases. This represents not only a breach of FOIA but a fundamental violation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the right to receive and impart information.

Public authorities ranging from the Ministry of Defence, Health and Safety Executive, and even the Office for Nuclear Regulation have used Section 14(1) against concerned citizens. Shockingly, even FOI requests submitted to the Duchy of Lancaster and the Duchy of Cornwall—which fall under Crown oversight—have been refused on “vexatious” grounds, citing my case.

This is not just bad administration—it is systemic corruption. The Dransfield precedent is being used as a weapon to silence whistleblowers, deny legal rights, and suppress truths that the public has a moral and lawful right to know.

I respectfully ask you to:

1. Launch an independent public inquiry into the use and misuse of Section 14(1) FOIA, including the role played by the ICO.

2. Consider the repeal or radical reform of Section 14(1) to ensure it cannot be abused to conceal maladministration.

3. Reinforce the statutory independence and accountability of the ICO to prevent its further politicisation.

4. Review all FOIA case law which has relied on Dransfield v ICO to ensure it is compatible with UK human rights obligations.

My previous open letter to your predecessor, Elizabeth Truss, in 2016 went unanswered. I hope that, under your stewardship, the Ministry of Justice will no longer turn a blind eye to this democratic backslide.

I would welcome the opportunity to meet or correspond with your office to discuss this matter further,

Yours sincerely,

Alan M. Dransfield

FOI Campaigner