iSAYSO
MPI refusal under OIA s 18(h) / prosecution and enforcement accountability information
MPI have got to the point where they are refusing to answer questions, refusing to provide evidence by the set date by the judge, who says never mind we will proceed on to the hearing without evidence!!
Subject: Complaint — MPI refusal under OIA s 18(h) / prosecution and enforcement accountability information
Dear Ombudsman,
I request investigation of the Ministry for Primary Industries’ refusal of OIA26-0296 under section 18(h) of the Official Information Act 1982.
MPI refused the request by letter dated 11 May 2026.
The request sought serious accountability information concerning MPI prosecution activity, enforcement processes, litigation outcomes, costs, settlements, evidential standards, due process safeguards, Police involvement, public-interest assessments, quality assurance, decision-making thresholds, and internal or external reviews.
MPI declined the request on the basis that it had recently received a significant number of related OIA requests, that the requests were frequent, complex, lengthy, and similar in wording, and that MPI was concerned the requests may have been generated by artificial intelligence. MPI then asserted that the requests did not represent genuine attempts to access information for a serious purpose.
That refusal is not accepted.
The request itself is plainly serious. It concerns the exercise of coercive public powers, prosecution discretion, legal authority, public expenditure, Crown litigation risk, inter-agency enforcement, procedural fairness, Police involvement, and accountability for enforcement conduct.
MPI appears to have focused on the requester, the number of requests, the similarity of drafting, and suspicion of technological assistance, rather than establishing that this specific request was frivolous, vexatious, or trivial.
The use of structured wording, repeated subject matter, or drafting assistance does not make an OIA request frivolous or vexatious. Nor does the fact that several related requests have been made mean the information requested is trivial or abusive. Where a public enforcement agency exercises prosecution and coercive powers, repeated requests for accountability information may reflect the seriousness of the issue, not vexatiousness.
MPI also appears not to have properly considered partial release, refinement, transfer, consultation, or whether existing summary records, dashboards, registers, legal-services reports, cost records, settlement records, prosecution outcome records, or risk reports could be provided.
The refusal also creates a serious fairness and prejudice concern. MPI is an enforcement and prosecuting agency. Where MPI refuses to disclose information about prosecution standards, evidential sufficiency, public-interest decision-making, Police involvement, legal authority, warrant processes, enforcement safeguards, costs, settlements, and litigation outcomes, that refusal may prejudice persons involved in current or contemplated court proceedings. Such information may be directly relevant to procedural fairness, disclosure, abuse-of-process issues, evidential challenges, costs, settlement risk, judicial review, and scrutiny of publicly funded enforcement action.
I ask the Ombudsman to investigate:
1. whether MPI was entitled to rely on section 18(h);
2. whether MPI improperly treated the requester, frequency of requests, wording style, or suspected AI assistance as the basis for refusal;
3. whether MPI was required to assist with refinement before refusing the request;
4. whether MPI should have considered partial release;
5. whether MPI holds existing prosecution, enforcement, litigation, costs, settlements, risk, assurance, or outcome records;
6. whether MPI should be required to reconsider the request and issue a fresh OIA decision;
7. whether MPI’s refusal risks prejudicing persons involved in current or contemplated court proceedings involving MPI enforcement action.
Please treat this as a formal complaint.
I attach MPI’s refusal letter dated 11 May 2026.
Yours sincerely,
Tracy Lynch
For Records