Dear all

Thank you to everyone who replied to my note about access arrangements to
coroners' inquest files under FOI.

There was no confident consensus on how this issue should be approached,
although definitely a shared understanding of the concerns and issues
raised by these records under FOI.

Those who replied accept that the records are subject to an absolute
exemption which expires after 30 years.  No one appears comfortable with
making them available for general access in the searchroom immediately they
reach that point, because of the risk of individual files containing
information which could be covered by other exemptions.  One office cited
data protection concerns over information about parties (other than the
deceased who is subject of the inquest) mentioned in the inquest report who
may still be living, such as a drunk driver responsible for a fatal car
crash.   Most offices therefore seem to be moving towards an approach
whereby anyone requesting access to inquest reports over 30 years old but
less than 75 years old in the searchroom will be asked to submit a formal
FOI request.  Many offices will then consult with their local coroner over
the disclosure decision.  In many cases, this is similar to procedures
already in place, but some respondents noted that this meant more work in
terms of pinning down which exemption they are applying, and possibly in
redacting files to remove exempt information.

Some respondents mentioned the possibility of trying to exempt records
through recognition of the distress that they can cause to descendants and
surviving relatives.  Warwickshire has been batting this idea around as
well, but as a number of you also pointed out, this is tricky, and
subjective.  We have recently received a request from a researcher who
wishes to view her father's inquest report.  As a child, she found his body
when he committed suicide in the 1950s, and she feels that the newspaper
coverage at the time did not match her recollection of events.  The coroner
has given permission for her to view the file, but when we pointed out how
distressing these files can be, she made it very clear that she felt that
viewing the file could in no way prove more distressing than coping with
the event itself.

One office had physically removed photographs from files which were felt to
have similar sensitivities to inquest reports, and asked researchers
wishing to see them to make a separate request for them in an attempt to
prevent people seeing anything unpleasant without being prepared
beforehand.

It was interesting to note from the replies that I received that other
offices have also found their local coroner/s to be ill-briefed on the
impact of FOI on these records.  I will feed that observation back to TNA
via the working group looking at implementation of FOI in places of
deposit.

One office had received feedback from the ICO to the effect that one might
expect to receive requests for high profile inquests (such as Diana,
Princess of Wales) and that these cases might provide a useful steer, but I
haven't entirely followed the logic on that one because presumably the 30
year absolute exemption would apply in that particular case?

Finally, one other office shares a concern identified here, namely that
increased access to inquest files might encourage "ghoulish" interest.  I
am not sure that there is anything specific we can do if we suspect that
this is happening, but having to submit a written request for the 30-75
year bracket may deter some.

I hope this is an accurate reflection of the views people put forward.  TNA
was not amongst those replying on this issue, but it would be helpful to
hear whether they generally endorse this approach.

Caroline Sampson
Head of Archive Service
Warwickshire County Record Office
Priory Park
Cape Road
WARWICK
CV34 4JS

Tel:  01926 738950
Fax:  01926 738969