The question as to whether or not Iraq actually used chemical weapon-loaded Scud missiles during the 1991 Gulf War is still an open one. Further to this, there still remain outstanding questions about the claims that Iraq possessed illegally-retained Scud Missiles in the period prior to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq. There is no complete record to draw upon and no one organisation has ever been seen to have compiled an exhaustive and comprehensive analysis.

- A review by a former member of the Dhahran Scud Watchers Club


#7 - FCO Counter Proliferation Department FOIA Request
Reference Numbers FCO 0346-08 and 0529-08



Monday April 21 2008 at approximately 14.30

(Submitted by E-mail to xxxx.xxxxxxxx@fco.gov.uk)

XX Landemann Circus
Weston Super Mare
North Somerset
BS23 2QE

Mr XXXX XXXXXXXX
Counter Proliferation Department
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
King Charles Street
London
SW1A 2AH

21 April 2008


Re: Further Freedom of Information Act Request in respect of Freedom of Information
Request Reference: FCO 0023-08


Dear Mr XXXXXXXX

Following on from your response to me dated 03 April 2008 regarding my previous FOIA request, I now wish to make a new Freedom of Information Act request for the following information relating to Iraq's December 7th 2002 'Currently Accurate, Full and Complete Declaration'.

In light of the fact that the FCO is now in possession of a redacted copy of the documentation following my previous request whereby the copy of the documentation previously held by the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations was sent to the FCO in London for assessment in relation to my request, I now wish to determine:

a/. Which sections, pages and annexes of Iraq's ballistic missile declaration (part IV of the CAFCD) are contained in the redacted version of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD?

(For reference purposes:)

IV. Ballistic missile declaration

Pages

Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................1

Chapter 1: Chronological summary of the programme for ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometres................................................................................................................................................................2-11

Chapter 2: Organizational chart of the programme for ballistic missile projects................................................................................................................................................................699 [sic]

Chapter 3: Detailed information on projects and status of current activities.............................................................12-710

Chapter 4: Forms concerning ballistic missile systems and initial designs..............................................................711-824

Chapter 5: Details of projects and of procurement for 11 projects.
Paragraph 4 of chapter 5 -- relations with States, companies, establishments and main suppliers..............................................................................................................................................................825-836

Chapter 6: Actual use of ballistic missile power.................................................................................................................................................................837-1194

Chapter 7: Relationship with proscribed activities in other fields................................................................................................................................................................1195-1206

Chapter 8: Chronological summary: Ibn Firnas Company for remotely piloted aircraft.............................................................................................................................................................1207-1211

List of supporting documents.......................................................................................................................................................1212-1240

Annex containing supporting documents (5,074 pages)



b/. Whether any of the supporting documents contained in the Annex contain an account of Iraq's Scud missile holdings and/or consumption at any time?

c/. Whether or not the list of supporting documents (pages 1212-1240) is complete, and whether or not it could be made available to myself in whatever complete or redacted form it exists in, as currently held by the FCO?

Yours sincerely

Andrew XXXXX

Scudwatch.Org

Phone: 01934 4136XX

E-mail: xxxxxxxx@btinternet.com



Initial response from the FCO



From: xxxxxx.xxxx-xxxx@fco.gov.uk
To: xxxxxxxx@btinternet.com
Subject: FOI Request, Ref: 0346-08
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:20:28 +0100


Dear Mr XXXXX

Thank you for your Freedom of Information request. It has been passed to the relevant section within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to deal with. They will be in touch with you should your request need clarification.

We received your request on 21 April 2008 and will aim to respond within 20 working days.

Yours

XXXXXX XXXX-XXXX

Information Management Group

Information Rights Team



First formal response from the Counter Proliferation Department of the FCO



16 May 2008

Counter Proliferation Department
King Charles Street
London
SW1A 2AH

Tel: 020 7008 30XX
Fax: 020 7008 38XX
E-mail: xx-xxxx.xxxxxxx@fco.gov.uk

Mr Andrew XXXXX
XX Landemann Circus
Weston Super Mare
North Somerset
BS23 2QE

Dear Mr XXXXX

Freedom of Information Requests Reference: FCO 0023-08 and 0346-08

I refer to your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 ("the Act") for:

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has now completed its search for the information which you requested on 5 January 2008 (as follows):

a/. Whether the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations still holds or retains either the original or a copy (full or redacted) of the Iraqi December 7th 2002 declaration?

b/. If it does, whether it could and would please release to me Chapter 6 of part IV (which is the part of Iraq's ballistic missile declaration relating to Iraq's actual use of Scud-type ballistic missile power), complete with any supporting documents referred to by Chapter 6 as may be contained in the supporting document annex of 5047 pages?

c/. If the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations does not currently hold either the original or a copy of the declaration, whether the UK Permanent Mission was ever in possession, even briefly, of the complete original declaration or a copy thereof?

d/. If the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations was ever in possession of either the original or a copy of the declaration, between which dates was this documentation held by the UK Permanent Mission?

e/. If the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations previously held either the original or a copy of the declaration at any time, even briefly, but does not now currently still hold or retain control over this documentation, whether the UK Permanent Mission could please advise me as to when and where the documentation was sent or taken and where it is now believed to be located?

f/. If the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations passed control of either the original or a copy of the declaration to any other UK authority at any time, whether the UK Permanent mission could please advise me as to which department(s) of UK Government (e.g. FCO, MoD or sub-department(s) etc) took control of the original or the United Kingdom copy of the full declaration and/or any other full or redacted copies which were subsequently produced?


Having conducted a further search for the un-redacted version of the Iraqi Declaration of 7 December 2002, I can confirm that that the FCO does hold the information you seek. I must apologise for the inaccurate replies you have previously received regarding this matter. The document had been stored in an unmarked security cabinet, which was omitted from our earlier searches. Throughout our earlier searches we believed that the cabinet held old files destined for transfer to our archive.

I am now in a position to answer the various elements of your request as follows:

a) The FCO (which includes the UK's Permanent Mission to the UN) does hold a full, un-redacted copy of the Iraqi December 7th 2002 declaration.

b) The FCO does hold Chapter 6 of part IV and a CD-ROM entitled Missile Activity Supporting Documents December 2002. Please note that I am currently unable to confirm whether the CD-ROM contains all the supporting documents referred to in Chapter 6. The disc contains 5,047 pages of documentation and further assessment is needed to ascertain its completeness.

c) At the time of your request our Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York was in possession of a redacted copy of the declaration.

d) The Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York originally received copies of the declaration on 12 December 2002. The un-redacted copy was sent on to the FCO in London, arriving on 13 December 2002. The Permanent Mission retained a further redacted copy of the declaration until 23 January 2008 when it was sent to the FCO Counter Proliferation Department in London for assessment in relation to your request.

e) See d) above. FCO Counter Proliferation Department now holds the redacted copy of the declaration that UKMIS NY previously held.

f) We have established that the Ministry of Defence may currently hold an unredacted version of the declaration and we are following this up to confirm.

To enable us to process your request as quickly as possible, and taking into account the considerable size of the document, I should be grateful if you could confirm exactly which sections and pages you would like us to assess for release. Please be as specific as possible in stating exactly which pages you wish to receive however in refining your request, you should be aware that this does not necessarily guarantee disclosure of the information. I am particularly concerned that your current request additionally seeks access to all supporting documents referenced in Chapter 6. The process of identifying those documents from the text of the chapter and then finding and extracting them from the CD-ROM may well exceed the FOIA handling limit of £600. You may therefore wish to delay requesting this additional information at this stage. As I am sure you will appreciate the process of assessing this information is likely to be extremely time consuming and will in all probability require considerable consultation in and beyond Whitehall.

If you have any queries about this letter please contact me. Please quote the reference number above in any future communication.

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request and wish to make a complaint or request an internal review of our decision you should write to me at xx-xxxx.xxxxxxx@fco.gov.uk, or at the address above.

If you are not content with the outcome of that internal review you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally the Information Commissioner's Office cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaint procedure provided by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at

The Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

I should be grateful if you could submit a refined request that seeks access to specific page ranges within the Declaration. Our assessment of the required material will then commence immediately.

Yours sincerely,

XX-XXXX XXXXXXX

Counter Proliferation Department

cc. Ministry of Defence



Follow up letter to the Counter Proliferation Department of the FCO



XX Landemann Circus
Weston Super Mare
North Somerset
BS23 2QE

Ms XX-XXXX XXXXXXX
Counter Proliferation Department
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
King Charles Street
London
SW1A 2AH

22 May 2008


Re: Freedom of Information Act requests (ref number 0023-08 and 0346-08),
and further NEW Freedom of Information Act request.


Dear Ms XXXXXXX

Thank you for your FOIA response to me dated 16 May 2008, and for your follow-up phone call to myself today.

Following on from your above-dated response to me regarding my previous FOIA request (reference FCO 0023-08), informing me that the FCO has now located an un-redacted copy of Iraq's December 7th 2002 'Currently Accurate, Full and Complete Declaration', I now wish to request the release of the entirety of Chapter 6 of Part IV (Iraq's ballistic missile declaration) of the CAFCD, as was initially requested by myself on 05 January 2008.

(For reference purposes:)

IV. Ballistic missile declaration

Pages

[]

Chapter 6: Actual use of ballistic missile power.................................................................................................................................................................837-1194

[]


With respect to my later FOIA request dated 21 April 2008 (reference FCO 0346-08), I now wish to request the release of the list of supporting documents as contained in Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD.

(For reference purposes:)

IV. Ballistic missile declaration

Pages

[]

List of supporting documents.......................................................................................................................................................1212-1240

[]

In addition to release of the List, I wish to request confirmation that Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD is NOT contained in the redacted copy of the documentation which was previously held by the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations and then sent to London following on from my initial FOI request of 05 November 2007.

(For reference from the FCO response to me dated 03 April 2008:)

B/. The FCO does not currently hold Chapter 6 of part IV. It is possible that we hold some of the supporting documents referred to in Chapter 6. However not holding Chapter 6 we cannot be sure which of these documents are referred to in that Chapter.

Further to the above I wish to make a NEW Freedom of Information Act request to determine:

a/. Whether the December 7th 2002 CAFCD as initially presented to UNMOVIC Executive Chairman Hans Blix (or his delegated representative(s)) was written in English or Arabic?

b/. Whether the FCO regards each of my FOIA requests as separate entities and therefore applies a £600 FOIA handling limit to each one individually?

c/. With whom and with which authorities does the FCO anticipate the requirement to undertake further consultation regarding my series of FOIA requests regarding the Iraqi December 7th 2002 CAFCD?

(For reference from your response to me dated 16 May 2008:)

[]

"As I am sure you will appreciate the process of assessing this information is likely to be extremely time consuming and will in all probability require considerable consultation in and beyond Whitehall."

[]

Yours sincerely

Andrew XXXXX

Scudwatch.Org

Phone: 01934 4136XX

E-mail: xxxxxxxx@btinternet.com



Further response from the Counter Proliferation Department of the FCO



24 June 2008

Counter Proliferation Department
King Charles Street
London
SW1A 2AH

Tel: 020 7008 30XX
Fax: 020 7008 38XX
E-mail: xx-xxxx.xxxxxxx@fco.gov.uk

Mr Andrew XXXXX
XX Landemann Circus
Weston Super Mare
North Somerset
BS23 2QE

Dear Mr XXXXX

Freedom of Information Requests Reference: FCO 0346-08

Thank you for your clarification of the above request. I can confirm that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office does hold information falling within the terms of your request in which you asked for;

Chapter 6 of Part IV (Iraq's ballistic missile declaration) of the CAFCD, as was initially requested by myself on 05 January 2008.

List of supporting documents as contained in Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD.

In addition you asked for:

1. Confirmation that Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD is NOT contained in the redacted copy of the documentation which was previously held by the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations and then sent to London following on from my initial FOI request of 05 November 2007.

The FOI Act obliges us to respond to requests promptly and in any case no later than 20 working days after receiving your request. However, when a qualified exemption applies to the information and the public interest test is engaged, the Act allows the time for response to be longer than 20 working days, and a full response must be provided within such time as is reasonable in all circumstances of the case. We do, of course, aim to make all decisions within 20 working days, including in cases where we need to consider where the public interest lies in respect of a request for exempt information. In this case, however, we have not yet reached a decision on where the balance of the public interest lies.

In your case we estimate that it will take an additional 20 days to take a decision on where the balance of the public interest lies. Therefore, we plan to let you have a response by 22 July. If it appears that it will take longer than this to reach a conclusion, we will keep you informed.

The specific exemption(s) which apply in relation to your request is: Section 27 International Relations.

Further to the above request a new Freedom of Information request was received to determine:

a/. Whether the December 7th 2002 CAFCD as initially presented to UNMOVIC Executive Chairman Hans Blix (or his delegated representative(s)) was written in English or Arabic?

b/. Whether the FCO regards each of my FOIA requests as separate entities and therefore applies a £600 FOIA handling limit to each one individually?

c/. With whom and with which authorities does the FCO anticipate the requirement to undertake further consultation regarding my series of FOIA requests regarding the Iraqi December 7th 2002 CAFCD?

These questions are being considered under the current request (0346-08) and will be addressed at a later stage in our substantive response letter.

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request and wish to make a complaint or request an internal review of our decision you should write to me at; xx-xxxx.xxxxxxx@fco.gov.uk , or at the address above. Please note any request for an internal review must be submitted within 40 working days from the date our response was issued.

If you are not content with the outcome your complaint, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints procedure provided by The Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

The Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Please contact me if you have any queries about this letter.

Yours sincerely,

XX-XXXX XXXXXXX

Counter Proliferation Department



Second further response from the Counter Proliferation Department of the FCO



01 July 2008

Counter Proliferation Department
King Charles Street
London
SW1A 2AH

Tel: 020 7008 30XX
Fax: 020 7008 38XX
E-mail: xx-xxxx.xxxxxxx@fco.gov.uk

Mr Andrew XXXXX
XX Landemann Circus
Weston Super Mare
North Somerset
BS23 2QE

Dear Mr XXXXX

Freedom of Information Request Reference: 0529-08

I refer to your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 ("the Act") for:

"Following on from your above-dated response to me regarding my previous FOIA request (reference FCO 0023-08), informing me that the FCO has now located an un-redacted copy of Iraq's December 7th 2002 'Currently Accurate, Full and Complete Declaration', I now wish to request the release of the entirety of Chapter 6 of Part IV (Iraq's ballistic missile declaration) of the CAFCD, as was initially requested by myself on 05 January 2008.

(For reference purposes:)

IV. Ballistic missile declaration

Pages

Chapter 6: Actual use of ballistic missile power.................................................................................................................................................................837-1194

With respect to my later FOIA request dated 21 April 2008 (reference FCO 0246-08), I now wish to request the release of the list of supporting documents as contained in Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD.

(For reference purposes:)

IV. Ballistic missile declaration

Pages

List of supporting documents.......................................................................................................................................................1212-1240

In addition to release of the List, I wish to request confirmation that Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD is NOT contained in the redacted copy of the documentation which was previously held by the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations and then sent to London following on from my initial FOI request of 05 November 2007.

(For reference from the FCO response to me dated 03 April 2008:)

B/. The FCO does not currently hold Chapter 6 of part IV. It is possible that we hold some of the supporting documents referred to in Chapter 6. However not holding Chapter 6 we cannot be sure which of these documents are referred to in that Chapter.

Further to the above I wish to make a NEW Freedom of Information Act request to determine:

a/. Whether the December 7th 2002 CAFCD as initially presented to UNMOVIC Executive Chairman Hans Blix (or his delegated representative(s)) was written in English or Arabic?

b/. Whether the FCO regards each of my FOIA requests as separate entities and therefore applies a £600 FOIA handling limit to each one individually?

c/. With whom and with which authorities does the FCO anticipate the requirement to undertake further consultation regarding my series of FOIA requests regarding the Iraqi December 7th 2002 CAFCD?


I would like to apologise for any confusion caused by the earlier sent to you on the 24th June 2008 however, based on advice from Foreign and Commonwealth Information Management Group we will now treat your request of 22 May 2008 as a new request 0529-08 and will close the previous requests logged under 023-08 and 0346-08.

I am now in a position to answer the various elements of your request as follows:

With regards to your request for the release of the entirety of Chapter 6 Part IV (Iraq's ballistic missile declaration) of the CAFCD and the list of supporting documents as contained in Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is in the process of assessing your request.

I can inform you that on further assessment of the CAFCD, any information written in Arabic within the document is being withheld under section 12. The process of translating any information for assessment will exceed the FOIA handling limit of £600.

To confirm, any information written in English is in the process of being assessed.

a. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office can confirm that the un-redacted copy of Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD as held by Counter Proliferation Department is written in both Arabic and English.

b. I can confirm that in regards to FOIA requests and the £600 FOIA handling limit, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office looks at each aspect of an FOI request individually and therefore as per your query would not apply an £600 FOIA handling limit to each one individually.

c. With regards to your question as to who the Foreign and Commonwealth Office anticipates the requirement to undertake further consultation will be, I can inform you that the Ministry of Defence and the UK Mission in New York will be consulted.

I would like to confirm that the new deadline for 0529-08 will be 20 days from the date of this letter and therefore plan to let you have a response by 23 July. We are currently working on your request and hope to provide you with a substantive response as soon as possible. Should we need more time to assess the public interest test, we will keep you informed.

If you have any queries about this letter please contact me. Please quote the reference number above in any future communication.

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request and wish to make a complaint or request an internal review of our decision you should write to me at xx-xxxx.xxxxxxx@fco.gov.uk, or at the address above.

If you are not content with the outcome of that internal review you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally the Information Commissioner's Office cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaint procedure provided by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at

The Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Yours sincerely,

XX-XXXX XXXXXXX

Counter Proliferation Department



A telephone call was received from the Counter Proliferation Department of the FCO on the evening of 22 July 2008 (the eve of the deadline for this continuing FOIA request), requesting clarification of the request in light of slightly differing wording contained in Chapter 6 of Part IV of Iraq's December 7th 2002 CAFCD. The following was returned by e-mail about an hour later.



To: XX-XXXX.XXXXXXX@fco.gov.uk

Dear Ms XXXXXXX

Thank you for your telephone call to me tonight requesting clarification regarding my FOIA requests, now merged as ref number: FCO 0529-08.

I confirm that I understand that the title of Chapter 6 of Part IV of Iraq's December 7th 2002 CAFCD may actually be "Operational use of missile force", as opposed to "Actual use of ballistic missile power" as was given in the index listing which I hold. (You may or may not find that this slight variation in wording exists between the index page(s) and the actual chapter itself in the copies of the CAFCD which the FCO currently hold in any case.)

I also confirm that I understand that the page numbering is the same in either case, namely pages 837 to 1194. I confirm that this still remains the part of the declaration which I require, although I do understand that the FCO intends to withhold any part of Chapter 6 written in Arabic on the grounds of translation costs (under Section 12 of the FOI Act).

To further clarify my request, I am seeking the section(s) of Chapter 6 which refer to Iraq's 1990/1991 actual and/or operational use of Scud missiles, and not necessarily relating to Iraq's use of Scud missiles during the 1980-88 Iran/Iraq War if this additional information would put my request(s) outside the £600 limit.

I also confirm that I still require the "List of supporting documents" as found in Part IV (the ballistic missile declaration of the CAFCD) at pages 1212 to 1240.

In addition to this information, I am requesting clarification as to whether Chapter 6, as above, is contained in the redacted copy of the CAFCD as held by the FCO with reference to the FOIA (FCO 0023-08) response sent to me by the Counter Proliferation Department of the FCO on 03 April 2008.

Yours faithfully,

Andrew XXXXX

Scudwatch.Org

Phone: 01934 4136XX

E-mail: xxxxxxxxx@btinternet.com



Third further response from the Counter Proliferation Department of the FCO (received the following day from the above)



23 July 2008

Counter Proliferation Department
King Charles Street
London
SW1A 2AH

Tel: 020 7008 30XX
Fax: 020 7008 38XX
E-mail: xx-xxxx.xxxxxxx@fco.gov.uk

Mr Andrew XXXXX
XX Landemann Circus
Weston Super Mare
North Somerset
BS23 2QE

Dear Mr XXXXX

Freedom of Information Requests Reference: FCO 0529-08

I am writing with regard to your Freedom of Information request, reference 0529-08.

Thank you for your email dated 22 July 2008 confirming clarification of the above request.

The FOI Act obliges us to respond to requests promptly and in any case no later than 20 working days after receiving your request. However, when a qualified exemption is engaged and the public interest test is being considered, the Act allows the time for response to be longer than 20 working days, and a full response must be provided within such time as is reasonable in all circumstances of the case. We do, of course, aim to make all decisions within 20 working days, including in cases where we need to consider where the public interest lies in respect of a request. In this case, however, we have not yet reached a decision on where the balance of the public interest test lies.

In your case we estimate that it will take an additional 20 working days to take a decision on where the balance of the public interest lies. Therefore, we plan to let you have a response by 20 August 2008. If it appears that it will take longer than this to reach a conclusion, we will keep you informed.

The specific exemption which is engaged in relation to your request is Section 27 (international relations).

In addition you asked for:

1. Confirmation that Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD is NOT contained in the redacted copy of the documentation which was previously held by the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations and then sent to London following on from my initial FOI request of 05 November 2007.

I can inform you that with regards to your request for confirmation, Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD is not/not contained in the redacted copy of the documentation which was previously held by the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations and then sent to London following on from your initial FOI request of 05 November 2007.

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request and wish to make a complaint or request an internal review of our decision you should write to me at xx-xxxx.xxxxxxx@fco.gov.uk, or at the address above. You have 40 working days to do so.

If you are not content with the outcome of that internal review, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaint procedure provided by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

The Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

Yours sincerely,

XX-XXXX XXXXXXX

Counter Proliferation Department



Further e-mail to the Counter Proliferation Department of the FCO requesting further clarification of the response of 23 July 2008.



To: XX-XXXX.XXXXXXX@fco.gov.uk

24 July 2008

Dear Ms XXXXXXX

Thank you for your letter to me of 23 July 2008 supplying a degree of clarification upon my requests of 22 May 2008 and 22 July 2008:

(For reference)

I wish to request confirmation that Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD is NOT contained in the redacted copy of the documentation which was previously held by the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations and then sent to London following on from my initial FOI request of 05 November 2007.

and:

I am requesting clarification as to whether Chapter 6, as above, is contained in the redacted copy of the CAFCD as held by the FCO with reference to the FOIA (FCO 0023-08) response sent to me by the Counter Proliferation Department of the FCO on 03 April 2008.

Unfortunately your reply to me still remains slightly unclear with your use of the term: "is not/not contained" in your paragraph:

I can inform you that with regards to your request for confirmation, Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD is not/not contained in the redacted copy of the documentation which was previously held by the UK Permanent Mission to the United Nations and then sent to London following on from your initial FOI request of 05 November 2007.

I think I understand this to mean that Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD is NOT contained in the redacted copy of the documentation, but your double use of the word 'not' (with a forward slash between them) has me slightly confused, in that this could possibly be read as a double negative indicating that Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD IS contained in the redacted copy of the documentation.

Could you please provide me with even further clarification on this very exact point, being as this is a quite important factor in determining whether the Iraqi December 7th 2002 CAFCD was redacted (by the US?) well beyond protecting NBC warfare technical knowledge, as was stated by the BBC on December 17th 2002.

(For reference)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2582741.stm

Tuesday, 17 December, 2002, 10:59 GMT Tensions at UN over Iraq dossier

[]

The other permanent members - China, France and Russia - are now studying the document.

They received uncensored copies of the dossier, but the non-permanent members will receive only edited versions - minus sensitive information that could be used to develop weapons of mass destruction.

[]

Yours faithfully,

Andrew XXXXX

Scudwatch.Org

Phone: 01934 4136XX

E-mail: xxxxxxxxx@btinternet.com



Final response from the Counter Proliferation Department of the FCO dated 20 August 2008.



20 August 2008

Counter Proliferation Department K317
King Charles Street
London
SW1A 2AH

Tel: 020 7008 34XX
Fax: 020 7008 38XX
E-mail: xx-xxxx.xxxxxxx@fco.gov.uk

Mr Andrew XXXXX
XX Landemann Circus
Weston Super Mare
North Somerset
BS23 2QE

Dear Mr XXXXX,

Freedom of Information Request Reference: FCO 0529-08

I refer to your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

I can confirm that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has now completed its assessment of the information which you requested on 25 June and must inform you that the information you requested is exempt from release under sections 27(1)(a) and 27(2) of the Freedom of Information Act.

Section 27 of the Act requires the application of a public interest test. In reaching this decision I have considered both the factors in favour of release balanced against the factors in favour of withholding the information.

Releasing the information would demonstrate our openness and accountability as it would increase public knowledge of the issues we deal with and help to inform debate. However, balanced against this, we have judged that the factors in favour of withholding the information outweigh the factors in favour of disclosure. In respect of section 27(1)(a), the effective conduct of international relations depends upon maintaining trust and confidence between Governments. If the United Kingdom does not maintain this trust and confidence, its ability to protect and promote UK interests through international relations will be hampered. In respect of section 27(2), the information requested is confidential information obtained from a State other than the United Kingdom or from an international organisation or international court.

Only the Permanent 5 members of the UN Security Council received the full un-redacted CACFD. It is held within UNMOVIC archives and has been declared as proliferation sensitive. The UN Security Council's view is that proliferation and other sensitive information contained in the CAFCD, which is treated as confidential or strictly confidential and provided in confidence by UN member States, should be kept under strict control. Access to this information in the UNMOVIC archive is restricted for an initial period of 20 years.

The 10 elected Security Council members received the redacted version of the CAFCD because it was deemed that they did not have access to the proliferation-sensitive technologies contained in the full un-redacted version. We are therefore satisfied that the full un-redacted version contains confidential information provided by other States which would have been provided to the Permanent 5 Member States in the strictest confidence. In view of this, the proliferation sensitive information contained in the full un-redacted CAFCD should not be disseminated more widely. The principle of treating proliferation sensitive information provided by Member States in the strictest confidence was upheld in UN resolution 1762 dated 29 June 2007, to which the UK has agreed.

The effective conduct of international relations depends upon the UK maintaining the trust and confidence of other States, which allows for the free and frank exchange of information on the understanding that it will be treated in confidence. The other Permanent Members of the UN Security Council may be more reluctant to share sensitive information with the UK in future (particularly with regard to proliferation) if the full un-redacted CAFCD were to be released now. Furthermore, they may also be less likely to respect the confidentiality of information supplied by the UK to them, to the detriment of UK interests. This in turn would be likely to harm our relations with those Permanent Members, hampering our ability to protect and promote UK interests through international relations. For these reasons, we consider that the public interest in maintaining this exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the entirety of chapter 6 of the CAFCD and list of supporting documents.

If you have any queries about this letter please contact me. Please quote the reference number above in any future communication.

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request and wish to make a complaint or request an internal review of our decision you should write to me at xx-xxxx.xxxxxxx@fco.gov.uk, or at the address above.

If you are not content with the outcome of that internal review you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally the Information Commissioner's Office cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaint procedure provided by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at The Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Yours sincerely,

XX-XXXX XXXXXXX

Counter Proliferation Department



Request for an internal review sent to the Counter Proliferation Department of the FCO dated 10 September 2008.



XX Landemann Circus
Weston Super Mare
North Somerset
BS23 2QE

Ms XX-XXXX XXXXXXX Counter Proliferation Department K317
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
King Charles Street
London
SW1A 2AH

10 September 2008


Re: Request for an internal review in respect of the FCO final response to me in relation to my
Freedom of Information Act request reference number 0529-08.


Dear Ms XXXXXXX

I confirm that I am in receipt of your letter to me dated August 20th 2008 informing me that the information which I requested is exempt from release under sections 27(1)(a) and 27(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

In light of this response I would like to please request that an internal review now takes place.

I make this new request on the basis that the information which I earlier requested is related to Iraq's actual use of Scud type ballistic missiles during the latter part of the last century, and does not concern the actual construction or development of missiles. Scud missile technology relates to a much earlier period of time, going back to the days of the Cold War, and should therefore not be proliferation sensitive in any case.

In addition to this reasoning, I believe that there would be particular public interest in information relation to Iraq's use of Scud missiles during the 1991 Gulf conflict if it can be shown that it is possible that some of the missiles fired at that time were loaded with chemical warheads, this being a historically significant aspect which to date has never been publicly explored.

To reiterate, I am requesting the release of the entirety of Chapter 6 of Part IV (Iraq's ballistic missile declaration) of the December 7th 2002 Iraqi CAFCD, as well as the List of Supporting Documents relating to Chapter 6 as is contained in Part IV.

(For reference purposes:)

IV. Ballistic missile declaration

Pages

[]

Chapter 6: Actual use of ballistic missile power.................................................................................................................................................................837-1194

[]

List of supporting documents.......................................................................................................................................................1212-1240

[]

Further to the above, could you please confirm your receipt of my e-mail/letter to you dated July 24th 2008 requesting clarification of your term "is not/not contained", as was part of your e-mail/letter to me dated July 23rd 2008. I have not yet received a reply relating to this correspondence, if one was previously sent could you please send me a further copy for the sake of the completeness of my records.

Yours sincerely

Andrew XXXXX

Scudwatch.Org

Phone: 01934 4136xx

E-mail: xxxxxxxx@btinternet.com



Initial response from the FCO regarding request for Internal Review



Internal Review Request, Ref: 0529-08, Mr XXXXX

Friday, 12 September, 2008 2:51 PM

From: "xxxxxxx.xxxxx@fco.gov.uk" [xxxxxxx.xxxxx@fco.gov.uk]

To: xxxxxxxx@btinternet.com

Dear Mr XXXXX

Thank you for your request for an internal review of your Freedom of Information request. It has been passed to the relevant department within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to deal with. They will be in touch with you with an outcome.

Yours

XXXXXXX XXXXX

Information Rights Team



Internal Review response from the Deputy Head of the Counter Proliferation Department of the FCO dated 09 October 2008



09 October 2008

Mr Andrew XXXXX
XX Landemann Circus
Weston Super Mare
North Somerset
BS23 2QE

Dear Mr XXXXX,

FOI Request 0529-08: Iraq Declaration: Internal Review

You have requested an internal review of the decision, conveyed to you in XX-XXXX XXXXXXX's email of 20 August, not to disclose the entirety of Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 "Currently Accurate, Full and Complete Declaration" (CAFCD) made by Iraq. Your request was made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. I have conducted a full examination of the case, and have concluded the following.

Search for information and consultation

I have reviewed the information sources used in making this assessment, and the breadth of consultation undergone. I have concluded that there was a broad trawl for relevant information, and am content that a reasonable search was carried out in relation to your request. I also conclude that all appropriate stakeholders (including those outside the Foreign and Commonwealth Office) have been consulted.

I note that the request was subject to two extensions and that, on both occasions, you were made aware of such. While it is desirable to reply to such requests within the 20 day deadline, I consider the use of extensions to have been appropriate given the complexity of the issues concerned, the breadth of consultation undergone, and the use of a Public Interest Test.

Use of exemptions

I have reviewed the exemptions used, and concur with Ms XXXXXXX's assessment that the information held by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is exempt from release under sections 27(1)(a) and 27(2) of the Freedom of Information Act. I also conclude that the factors considered during application of the Public Interest Test have been properly recorded and explained.

Factors in favour of release include that it would increase public knowledge of the issues and inform debate. However, as conveyed to you in the email of 20 August, the effective conduct of international relations depends upon the UN maintaining the trust and confidence of other States, which allows for the free and frank exchange of information on the understanding that it will be treated in confidence. If the requested information were to be released, such States may be more reluctant to share sensitive information with the UK Government in future, and may be less likely to respect the confidentiality of the information supplied by the UK Government to them. In both instances, there would be prejudice to relations between the UK and that State, and I therefore conclude that the information was and remains exempt from disclosure under section 27(1)(a).

I also conclude that the information was and remains exempt from disclosure under section 27(2), as it is indeed confidential information gained from "a State other than the United Kingdom or from an international organisation". It is clear from my review that the information requested is covered by the stipulations highlighted in Ms XXXXXXX's email, namely that it should be kept under strict control, and should be restricted for an initial period of 20 years.

Given the reasons above, I do not believe that the public interest favours release over exemption.

Your specific queries

I note the points raised in the third paragraph of your 10 September email in support of why the information should be released. These points were considered as part of my review and I note that they were addressed as part of your original request.

I do find that we have yet to reply to your request of 24 July for clarification of the precise meaning of

"...Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD is not/not contained in the redacted copy of the documentation...".
I can confirm that this is intended to mean that

"...Chapter 6 of Part IV of the December 7th 2002 CAFCD is not contained in the redacted copy of the documentation..."

If you are not content with the outcome of this internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

Yours sincerely,

XXXXX XXXXXXXX

XXXXX XXXXXXXX
Deputy Head
Counter Proliferation Department
Foreign and Commonwealth Office