Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 8 rti classifier,which section 8 1 applies,rti exemption classifier,pio exemption finder,section 8 1 j section 8 1 h personal information tool)&metatag-description=(Free Section 8 classifier — paste your RTI query or PIO reply draft, get a ranked list of which Section 8(1) sub-clauses a PIO is most likely to invoke. Covers §8(1)(a) through §8(1)(j), §9, §11, §24. No login, no tracking.)}}
+====== Section 8 Classifier — which exemption applies? ======
+**Paste the information your RTI asks for (or the information a PIO is considering withholding), and this free classifier returns a ranked list of which §8(1) sub-clause is most likely to attach. Covers all ten §8(1) sub-clauses plus §9 (copyright), §11 (third-party procedure), and §24 (exempt organisations). Pure heuristic — no login, no data leaves your browser.**
+{{url>https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/section-8-classifier-app.html 100%x900px noborder|Section 8 Classifier}}
+<WRAP center round help 95%>
+**Not loading?** Open the tool directly at [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/section-8-classifier-app.html|/tools/section-8-classifier-app.html]].
+</WRAP>
+===== Who this is for =====
+  * **PIOs** drafting a reasoned §7(8)(i) rejection — use as a first-pass check on which sub-clause to cite
+  * **RTI applicants** anticipating a rejection and preparing an appeal
+  * **FAAs** auditing a PIO's sub-clause citation during First Appeal
+  * **Law students and researchers** building intuition for which exemption governs which fact pattern
+===== Limitations =====
+  * **Heuristic only** — keyword-matching, not legal analysis. A real RTI always turns on specific facts and public-authority records.
+  * **Top result ≠ valid refusal** — the classifier indicates the clause a PIO **might** invoke, not whether it is defensible on appeal.
+  * **Post-DPDP 2025** — §8(1)(j) detection assumes the amended framework effective 14 November 2025.
+  * **Not exhaustive** — some niche sub-clauses and procedural provisions (§8(2), §8(3), §10) are context-dependent and not directly classified.
+===== How to use the result =====
+  - **Top-ranked clause** — treat as the **most likely** PIO response. Build your case-law citation around this clause before filing or replying.
+  - **Next 1-2 clauses** — note these as **fallback** grounds the PIO may cite. Your appeal should pre-empt these too.
+  - **No hit** — strong signal the RTI is **routinely disclosable**. If the PIO rejects anyway, treat it as a reasoned-order violation under §7(8)(i).
+===== Related tools =====
+  * [[:tools:timeline-calculator|RTI Timeline Calculator]]
+  * [[:tools:rti-generator-app|RTI Application Generator]]
+  * [[:tools:first-appeal-builder-app|First Appeal Builder]]
+  * [[:tools:pio-reply-checker-app|PIO Reply Checker]]
+  * [[:tools:chat|RTI Wiki AI — free chat]]
+===== Related reading =====
+  * **[[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection|Grounds for RTI Rejection — decision tree]]**
+  * **[[:pio-section-8-1-j-framework|§8(1)(j) framework — post-DPDP 2025]]**
+  * **[[:pio-rti-reply-guide|PIO RTI Reply Guide]]**
+  * **[[:cases:search|Case-law search — 210+ rulings]]**
+~~NOCACHE~~
+//Last reviewed: 22 April 2026.//
+{{tag>tool classifier section-8 exemptions}}

Was this helpful? — views