Freedom of Information

We sought records on the Smith Barcadere Redevelopment Project (Request for Quotations T2019/007, issued December 2019). The Cabinet Office withheld the extract of Cabinet minutes on the planning-permission exemption, relying on the Cabinet-deliberations exemption in section 19 of the FOI Law. On appeal, the Ombudsman ruled the extract was not exempt and ordered its release, and found the Cabinet Office had breached the FOI Law by failing to conduct an internal review.

We asked who approved government funding to the Cayman Islands Legal Practitioners Association (CILPA), a private association previously engaged as the attorneys’ AML supervisor (which obtained a loan from the Government), and the Cayman Attorneys Regulation Authority (CARA), which previously purported to act as the attorneys’ AML supervisor — and for the underlying agreements, invoices and approvals. The Portfolio of Legal Affairs, through the Attorney General’s Chambers, released the purchase agreements, quarterly invoices, CARA financial statements and output memos, the loan agreement and a Cabinet extract. We appealed to the Ombudsman over remaining records.

We asked the Cayman Islands National Attractions Authority for the Queen Elizabeth II Botanic Park’s budgets and revenues for 2019–2023, and what drove any revenue increases (such as higher entrance fees). The Authority granted the request in full and released the park’s budgets, segmented financial statements and written answers. A leaked email shows lack of PPC approval. The Ministry of Finance & Economic Development separately confirmed (FOI/110118) that no minutes of meetings were kept in relation to the development and operations of the Children’s Garden for the years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023. The Cayman Islands National Attractions Authority Act, 2023 (Act 8 of 2023) came into force on 1 June 2023, replacing the Tourism Attractions Board; Cabinet did not appoint the new Authority’s board until 1 September 2023, so when the fee increase took effect on 1 July 2023 the Authority had no board of directors in place. A legal opinion of the Attorney General’s Chambers, leaked to the media, states that the increase in admission fees to the attractions (Pedro St James and the Queen Elizabeth II Botanic Park) was unlawful and ultra vires the CINAA Act, and recommends that the fees revert to their previous level. It is unclear whether the Government took any action. Separately, although the register of non-profit organisations showed the Tourism Attraction Board as an active non-profit, the law was later changed to establish the Cayman Islands National Attractions Authority in its place. This raises the question why the non-profit named “Tourism Attraction Board” continued to exist, and who monitored it.

The matter was referred to the police, who declined to investigate. It has been over a year since we requested written reasons for that decision, and the police have given no reasons for their refusal to investigate. (Government departments must give reasons for their decisions under the Cayman Islands Constitution.)

We asked the Director of Public Prosecutions for the number, nature and reasons for its decisions not to prosecute criminal matters (2017 onward, later narrowed to 2022–2024). The ODPP refused, citing unreasonable diversion of resources under section 9(c) of the FOI Act. On appeal, the Ombudsman upheld the refusal, but encouraged the ODPP to proactively publish aggregate data on prosecutorial decisions to improve transparency.

We asked the Water Authority how often it tests piped water (to residences and businesses) for toxins and contaminants, the results, marine testing in George Town Harbour (Hog Sty Bay), and whether effluent is discharged into the North Sound or other waters. The Authority granted the request in full and released its water-quality result summaries, overseas laboratory testing and the Hog Sty Bay marine sampling, alongside the WHO and EU water-quality guidelines it applies.

We asked the Portfolio of Legal Affairs for a breakdown of the Caymanian and non-Caymanian lawyers it contracts (with post titles), how many are physically present in Cayman versus working from outside the islands, and related staffing and salary records. After a clarification request, the Attorney General’s Chambers responded in two letters and released the staffing breakdown, the civil-service salary scale and HR records — including a contract-extension form showing a Deputy Solicitor General (Advisory and Administration) working from overseas rather than in the Cayman Islands.

We asked the Department of Environment about coral-reef damage recorded in the West Bay Replenishment Zone (Seven Mile Beach Marine Park) in January 2016 — an area initially estimated at about 1,200 square metres (13,800 sq ft) — and whether any legal action, charges, fines or settlement followed. The DoE declined to confirm or deny what records it held, relying on section 17(1)(b)(i) of the FOI Act, while pointing to records already in the public domain. On appeal, the Ombudsman upheld that exemption and closed the matter. Through this request, no party confirmed or denied responsibility for the approximately 13,800 sq ft of reef damage, and no party was charged with an environmental offence.

We asked the Ministry of Finance for records on the Government’s post-retirement (pension) liability. The Treasury Department responded that it does not hold the information in the format requested. After an internal review was refused, we appealed to the Ombudsman in August 2024.

We asked Judicial Administration for any records of prisoner complaints or allegations (including indecent assault, sexual misconduct or physical impropriety) made against lawyers in 2023–2026, and any resulting investigations or disciplinary action. The Authority responded that it had received no such grievances, complaints or allegations for that period.

We asked Judicial Administration for the number of convictions for importation and/or possession of firearms from 2019–2024, to understand how many Caymanians were being sent to prison versus how many tourists were only receiving fines. The Authority disclosed the total — 240 convictions — but declined to break the figures down by nationality, citing an unreasonable diversion of resources. We sought an internal review and appealed to the Ombudsman.

We asked OfReg about damage to Cayman’s two international submarine cables in 2024. OfReg provided a detailed account of the Maya-1 fault (21 June 2024, off Cancun, Mexico) and the full repair timeline through 10 September 2024, and explained how traffic was rerouted via the Cayman–Jamaica Fibre System and Maya-1’s south segment. It withheld the underlying outage reports and stakeholder communications, citing critical-national-infrastructure security (section 15(a)) and personal information (section 23(1)) of the FOI Act. We appealed to the Ombudsman.

A separate request to OfReg about the loss of internet service to customers during the outage; on appeal the records were disclosed (with redactions) and the matter was closed (29 Jan 2025).

We asked how many prohibited immigrants the Cabinet has approved to enter the Cayman Islands since 2017, the types and reasons, any policy changes, and the number and reasons for immigration-requirement waivers. The Cabinet Office granted full access to the aggregate figures (2017 to July 2021; later figures are published weekly in Cabinet post-meeting summaries). The Ministry of Border Control, Labour & Culture withheld the detailed records under the FOI Act’s Cabinet-deliberations exemption (s.19(1)(a)); on appeal, the Ombudsman upheld that exemption and closed the matter on 17 February 2025.

We put the same inquiry we made to Judicial Administration — any records of prisoner complaints or allegations against lawyers (2023–2026) — to the HM Cayman Islands Prison Service and the RCIPS. The Prison Service confirmed it holds no such records, and noted no other public authority does either.

We asked the Cayman Islands National Attractions Authority (CINAA) for records on the Children’s Garden (P2CG) project at the Queen Elizabeth II Botanic Park. CINAA did not respond within the statutory time, and we appealed; following the Ombudsman’s intervention CINAA disclosed records (appeals 202400731 and 202400732, closed 7 February 2025). The material includes an email leaked to the media raising concerns that about 78% of the project had proceeded without the required Public Procurement Committee (PPC) approval, and questioning the use of the disaggregation rule to split the contract.