The 114 files contained allegations of abuse at Westminster, but during his select committee appearance Mr Sedwill said he was unable to confirm if other files next to the missing child abuse allegations were also missing or not.
“I couldn’t believe that one of the most important administrators in the country hadn’t thought to have this checked – something that the most junior member of his clerical staff would do as a matter of course,” said Mr Oliver.
Mr Sedwill said he was “concerned” but insisted people “should not assume there was anything sinister” about the missing files – and confessed that he did not know the titles or contents of the documents, which dated from 1979 to 1999.
Despite sending the FoI request on July 8, Mr Oliver had still not received a response by the end of September.
It was revealed on Thursday that the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) – which monitors the operation of the Freedom of Information Act – had issued a formal decision ordering the Home Office to respond.
Mr Oliver reacted by saying: “I am grateful for the help of the Commissioner’s Office. Despite [Home Secretary Theresa] May’s assertion that no stone will be left unturned, I’m beginning to wonder if they would rather the stones were buried.”
As well as the FoI request, Guildford MP Anne Milton has also written to the minister of state at the Home Office with responsibility for child abuse matters, Mike Penning.
Despite contacting him in early November, she too has not had a response.
The ICO decision requires the Home Office to respond by January 13 2015.
Failure to comply may result in the ICO sending written certification of this fact to the High Court and it being dealt with as a contempt of court.
A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are aware of the ruling by the Information Commissioner’s Office and will respond within the given period.”
Mr Oliver’s Freedom of Information request to the Home Office on July 8:
“114 files are missing or destroyed. How many of these were given unique file titles and how many were held as sub-files under a main file heading? Please list how many unique file headings there were, how many files were held as sub-files under a main subject heading, how many main subject headings there were and how many of the 114 files were held under each main heading.
“114 files, which would have had unique file, or sub-file numbers, are missing or destroyed. Could you confirm whether, in each file case, files with numbers adjacent to these files, but not related to child abuse, have also been destroyed or are missing? In how many cases are the file numbers of the missing/destroyed files adjacent to file numbers where the files still exist?
“Are you, any other Minister, or any civil servant, approaching the Security Services (in whatever guise) to ascertain whether they have copies of any of the information that was contained in these 114 files or if they have information concerning child abuse by Government Ministers, Members of Parliament or senior civil servants. If so, how will that information be made public, either now or following due process?
“Are you, any other Minister, any other MP, or any other person, approaching the Whips of each main political party to discover what information they have or had in their ‘black boxes’ concerning child abuse by Government Ministers, Members of Parliament or senior civil servants?
“Are you contacting civil servants past and present, who would have dealt with these files, in order to ascertain whether they remember what was in them, or can give some indication of where they might be?”