EXEMPTION NOTICE
Reference: 3111/09
Information Requested:
The areas where stop and searches under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 have taken
place.
HARM in relation to prejudice based exemptions
Section 24 (1)
Future police operations may be prejudiced if information relating to the use of police powers
under the Terrorism Act and related strategy and tactics that any figures may allude to is
inappropriately placed into the public domain. The requested statistics can be combined with
information provided from other areas and a ‘map’ of proactive police action in relation to terrorist
activity can be drawn. This information could aid terrorists when planning their activities and
make frustrating their aims more difficult as they identify areas where detection seems less likely.
Ultimately this would increase the threat to national security.
Section 30 (1)
Release of information through the Freedom of Information Act removes any of the legal
strictures and assumptions of confidentiality associated with the due legal process. Some of the
information you have requested may relate to current investigations and as a consequence these
could be jeopardised where release of information regarding an individual was identified.
Ongoing police investigations and/or pending trials may be compromised when the information
contributes to the identification of an individual or is used as counter intelligence against the
police service. This ultimately has safety implications for the general public, placing the well
being of citizens at risk and undermining Police operations.
Section 31 (1)
Where police investigations are continuing and where a subject may have been released without
charge, their future might irrevocably be damaged if their identity could be gleaned from the
information. In addition, if individuals and/or locations were identified, this would heighten risks to
those individuals and potentially to other persons who might reside in premises vacated by
relevant individuals. The experience of attacks (or unwelcome media attention) on suspected
paedophiles following press attention (or inaccurate local community targeting) indicates what
might be anticipated were this detailed data to be released.
PUBLIC INTEREST TEST
Public interest considerations favouring disclosure:
Section 30 (1)
Accountability
Such information may demonstrate to the general public that West Midlands Police are actively
involved in the prevention and detection of terrorist-based activities, particular following high-
profile events. In this case, forces may be obliged to demonstrate to the general public that they
are actively involved in the prevention and detection of terrorist-based activities by providing
statistical evidence of their performance
Section 24 (1), Section 31 (1)
Public debate
The release of accurate information will inform and enhance public debate on particular subjects
that may be topical. In this case, following high-profile terrorist activity and the release of such
Page 1 of 3
statistics may inform public debate and boost levels of confidence within the community that the
potential threat is being negated by the actions of the authorities.
Public interest considerations favouring non-disclosure:
Section 24 (1), Section 30 (1)
Investigations
It is the Association of Chief Police Officer’s approach that information relating to an investigation
will rarely be disclosed under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. Whilst such
information may be released in order to serve a ‘tangible community benefit’ – to prevent or
detect crime or to protect life or property - it will only be disclosed following a Freedom of
Information request if there is are strong public interest considerations favouring disclosure. The
further the considerations favouring disclosure are from a core policing purpose, the lighter the
considerations will be.
On-going investigations
It would not be in the public interest to release information that may be of assistance to offenders
or prevent an individual from being brought to justice. The right to a fair trial is of paramount
importance and any disclosure could be subject to sub judice. In this case, forthcoming court
proceedings may be prejudiced by the release of data which may lead to the identification of
specific cases. In the worse case scenario, inappropriate disclosure may result in a mistrial.
Section 24 (1), Section 31 (1)
Efficient and effective conduct of the service/a force
Information relating to policing of terrorism activities is sensitive and inappropriate disclosure may
compromise the ability of the force in the future to prevent and detect crime and protect life
and/or property.
Law Enforcement
Where current or future law enforcement role of the force may be compromised by the release of
information, then this is unlikely to be in the interest of the public. In this case, for the reasons
outlined above, providing this detailed information could jeopardise future police operations and
compromise the future prevention and detection of crime.
Balancing Test
For a public interest test, issues that favour release need to be measured against issues that
favour non-disclosure. The public interest is not what interests the public, or a particular
individual, but what will be the greater good, if released, to the community as a whole.
The issues of awareness and public debate are noted. However, whilst the force is accountable
for its counter-terrorism activities, it is essential that the release of information does not enable a
national “map” to be drawn up indicating those geographical areas where an individual engaged
in terrorist activity would be less likely to be stopped by the police.
Although release might provide a greater transparency in the investigating process, there are
already a number of checks and balances on authorities to assess whether investigations are
conducted appropriately. Annual figures regarding searches under sections 44(1) and 44(2) of
the Terrorism Act 2000 and resultant arrests are released on the Ministry of justice website. In
addition if a person feels that they have been treated inappropriately by the police there are clear
processes in place to ensure that matters are investigated thoroughly and appropriately. These
processes are in place to ensure that all parties are given access to all the appropriate
information at the time of any trial and subsequently through court records.
Page 2 of 3
Releasing information outside of such a schedule could undermine the smooth running of these
processes and would impact on future judicial proceedings. Therefore the wider public interest
lies in protecting the ability of the public authority to conduct an effective investigation and
consider the outcome.
Having considered the arguments for and against, the public interest test favours maintaining the
exclusion of the duty to confirm or deny whether the information exists. It is not in the public
interest to disclose information that may compromise the force's ability to fulfil its core function of
law enforcement or to endanger the health and safety of the general public, or our officers.
This means that in this specific case at this time it would not be in the public interest to release
information to this level of detail.
Page 3 of 3
