I’ll have to be politer than that of course but I’ll make sure that I convey that meaning.
I have an appeal soon at a First-Tier Tribunal (which is normally public btw). There is secret medical evidence that is withheld from me ‘for my own good’. On my request for a mandatory reconsideration I said I suffer from this and that. This and that is the secret medical evidence that is censored and not to be mentioned. The Tribunal will consider it, the DWP have used it in reaching their decision but I don’t even have access to the [ed: real] decision I am supposed to be appealing against!
The WCA handbook discusses so-called ‘Harmful Information’ at section 4.2.1.
This is information which has not been disclosed to the claimant by their medical attendant, and of which they are unaware. It is information which would be considered as seriously harmful to their health if divulged to them and is the only type of information which under the regulations may be withheld from the claimant in the event of a review or appeal. [Highlighted in bold in the original)
Section 4.2.1 continues to describe how to recognise ‘Harmful Information’ omitted from reports by leaving a gap followed by a ‘harmless synonym’. So, look out for gaps and harmless synonyms in those WCA reports because they mean that there’s secret evidence withheld from the claimant.
Hold on a minute, I said in my request for mandatory reconsideration that I suffer from this and that. In what sense am I not aware of it? And if I already know, how can it be harmful for me to know about it? I know it’s this and that because this and that is noticeably absent from all the papers. I say I suffer from this and that. I am denied addressing DWP’s response because it’s censored.
The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement Chamber) Rules 2008
(2) The Tribunal may give a direction prohibiting the disclosure of a document or information to a person if—
(a)the Tribunal is satisfied that such disclosure would be likely to cause that person or some other person serious harm; and
(b)the Tribunal is satisfied, having regard to the interests of justice, that it is proportionate to give such a direction.
(4) The Tribunal must conduct proceedings as appropriate in order to give effect to a direction given under paragraph (2).
So the Tribunal is satisfied that it is proportionate to withhold evidence that does not meet the criteria for harmful information and therefore should not be withheld at appeal. I wonder what it says. I’m not taking part in that bullshit
31/1/18 Adjourned. The tribunal only looks at the papers immediately before the appeal.