22 October 2024
45 Pipitea Street, Thorndon, Wellington 6011
PO Box 805, Wellington 6140
Phone +64 4 495 7200
Peter Brown
Email [email address]
[FYI request #28507 email]
Website www.dia.govt.nz
Tēnā koe Peter,
Your Official Information Act 1982 request, reference OIA24/25-0299
Thank you for your request of 24 September 2024 to the Department of Internal Affairs (the
Department) under the Official Information Act 1982 (the Act). Your full request is attached
as
Appendix A.
The timeframe to respond to your request has been extended by
25 working days, to
27
November 2024, under section 15A(1)(b) of the Act. The extension is required because the
necessary consultations to make a decision on the request cannot reasonably be made
within the original time limit.
You have the right to seek an investigation and review of my decision by the Office of the
Ombudsman. The postal address of the Office of the Ombudsman is PO Box 10152,
Wellington. Alternatively, you can phone 0800 802 602 or email
[email address].
Nāku noa, nā
Anita Balakrishnan
Director Ministerial and Monitoring
Appendix A
In January 2019, in response to a OIA request for the document on AI and ethics developed
for the 'Digital 9' forum in israel held the previous year, DIA contacted representatives of the
nations and israel that had contributed to that document to offer to redact anything they
wanted hidden from the OIA request.
1) I am requesting, in their original form (not a summary) all communications within DIA and
with external parties including (but not exclusively) israel about the response to this OIA
request.
2) At least in the case of israel, DIA offered to allow them to redact any information they had
provided to DIA, including their admissions of their abuse of AI to harass and murder political
opponents made in the document.
Is this standard DIA policy when responding to OIA requests- would such consideration be
given to a free country like Cuba or Iran, or only to israel and its proxies like the USA or
Canada?
3) In response to questions from agents of the israeli regime, which has repeatedly been
involved in political assassinations of foreign civilians it sees as inconvenient, and which has
been repeatedly exposed as conducting illegal 'intelligence' activities within New Zealand,
DIA provided personal information about the identity of the requester, including their name,
their employer and job title, and their political affiliation.
3a) Is it standard practice for DIA when consulting external parties in response to a OIA
request to disclose the name, employer, job title, and political affiliation of the requester?
3b) Did DIA seek approval from the requester before disclosing their protected private
information to the israeli regime, potentially endangering their life?
Page 2 of 2
