Metropolitan Police Investigation Against GMC

Dear Mr Jackson

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2009060002146
I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 08/06/2009. I note you seek
access to the following information:

* "This is a Freedom of Information request about whether Mr Paul
Philip, Deputy Chief Executive of the GMC is being investigated for
offering to bribe a serving metropolitan police officer."

Your request will now be considered in accordance with the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (the Act). You will receive a response within
the statutory timescale of 20 working days as defined by the Act,
subject to the information not being exempt or containing a reference
to a third party. In some circumstances the MPS may be unable to
achieve this deadline. If this is likely you will be informed and
given a revised time-scale at the earliest opportunity.

Some requests may also require either full or partial transference to
another public authority in order to answer your query in the fullest
possible way. Again, you will be informed if this is the case.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet, which details your
right of complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
contact me by email, quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Katie London
Support Officer
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think
the decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your
request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is
to telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your
decision letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues
and assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision
of the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act)
regarding access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS
to have the decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 40 working days.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied
with the decision you may make application to the Information
Commissioner for a decision on whether the request for information has
been dealt with in accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information
Commissioner please visit their website at
www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk. Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Jackson

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2009060002146
I write in connection with your request for information dated 08/06/2009
which was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 08/06/2009.
I note you seek access to the following information:

* This is a Freedom of Information request about whether Mr Paul Philip,
Deputy Chief Executive of the GMC is being investigated for offering
to bribe a serving metropolitan police officer.

DECISION

In accordance with the Act, this letter represents a Refusal Notice for
this particular request under Section 17(4).

Section 17(4) of the Act provides:

(4) A public authority is not obliged to make a statement under subsection
(1)(c) or (3) if, or to the extent that, the statement would involve the
disclosure of information which would itself be exempt information.

The Metropolitan Police Service can neither confirm nor deny that it holds
the information you requested as the duty in Section 1(1)(a) of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the following
exemptions:

Section 40(5)
Section 30(3)

Section 40 (5) - Personal Information
To confirm or deny whether personal information exists under the Act would
publicly reveal information about an individual(s), breaching the right to
privacy afforded to persons under the Data Protection Act 1998.

Section 30 (3) - Investigations and Proceedings Conducted by Public
Authorities
To confirm or deny whether an investigation has been conducted under the
Act, would publicly reveal this fact. Where such a request is made, the
public interest in that request must outweigh any reason for refusal. I
have determined that in all the circumstances of the case, the public
interest in maintaining the exclusion of the duty to neither confirm nor
deny outweighs the public interest in confirming whether or not the
information requested is held. To give a statement of the reasons why
neither confirming nor denying is appropriate in this case would itself
involve the disclosure of exempt information, therefore under section
17(4), no explanation can be given.

However, this should not be taken as necessarily indicating that any
information that would meet your request exists or does not exist.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet which details your right of
complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please write
or contact Carol Conway on telephone number 0207 230 5192 quoting the
reference number above.

Yours sincerely,

Carol Conway
Case Manager
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 40 working days.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Jackson

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2009070001367

I write in connection with your letter dated 3 July 2009 requesting that
the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) review your request for information
relating to:

* FOIA original complaint number 2009060002146.

The review will be conducted in accordance to the MPS's complaints
procedure. The MPS endeavour to respond to your complaint by 28 August
2009.

Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter, please
contact me quoting the reference number above.

Thank you for your interest in the MPS.

Yours sincerely

Sarah Strong
FOIA Policy Research & Complaints Officer

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 40 working days.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Jackson

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2009070001367

Further to our letter of 08 July 2009, I am now able to provide a full
response to your complaint dated 03 July 2009 concerning:

* Original FOIA reference 2009060002146.

You requested the following:

"This is a Freedom of Information Act request about whether Mr Paul
Philip, Deputy Chief Executive of the GMC, is being investigated for
offering to bribe a serving Metropolitan Police officer."

DECISION

The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has completed its review and has
decided to:

* Vary the original response.

REASON FOR DECISION

Before I explain the reasons for the decisions I have made in relation to
your Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) request, I thought that it
might assist you if I outline the parameters set out by the Act within
which a request for information can be answered.

The Act creates a statutory right of access to information held by public
authorities. A public authority in receipt of a request must, if
permitted, confirm if that public authority holds the requested
information and, if so, then communicate that information to the
applicant.

The right of access to information is not without exception and is subject
to a number of exemptions, which are designed to enable public authorities
to withhold information that is not suitable for release. Importantly, the
Act is designed to place information into the public domain, that is, once
access to information is granted to one person under the Act, it is then
considered public information and must be communicated to any individual
should a request be received.

I have considered your request for information within the provisions set
out by the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

In relation to my first duty under the Act, I am unable to confirm or deny
whether or not the MPS hold the information requested. This letter
therefore serves as a Refusal Notice under Section 17(1) of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (the Act).

Section 17(1) of the Act provides:

(1) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information,
is to any extent relying on a claim that any provision of Part II relating
to the duty to confirm or deny is relevant to the request or on a claim
that information is exempt information must, within the time for complying
with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice which-
(a) states that fact,
(b) specifies the exemption in question, and
(c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption
applies.

I have today decided to uphold Ms. Conway's decision to neither confirm
not deny by virtue of Section 40(5), but have overturned the use of
Section 30(3).

Section 40(5) of the Act provides:

(5) The duty to confirm or deny-
(a) does not arise in relation to information which is (or if it were held
by the public authority would be) exempt information by virtue of
subsection (1), and
(b) does not arise in relation to other information if or to the extent
that either-
(i) the giving to a member of the public of the confirmation or denial
that would have to be given to comply with section 1(1)(a) would (apart
from this Act) contravene any of the data protection principles or section
10 of the [1998 c. 29.] Data Protection Act 1998 or would do so if the
exemptions in section 33A(1) of that Act were disregarded, or
(ii) by virtue of any provision of Part IV of the [1998 c. 29.] Data
Protection Act 1998 the information is exempt from section 7(1)(a) of that
Act (data subject's right to be informed whether personal data being
processed).

The Metropolitan Police Service neither confirms nor denies that it holds
the requested information, as the duty in Section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom
of Information Act 2000 does not apply by virtue of the following
exemption:

Section 40(5) - Personal Information / Absolute Exemption

A Freedom of Information Act request is not a private transaction. Both
the request itself, and any information disclosed, are considered suitable
for open publication. This is because, under Freedom of Information, any
information disclosed is released into the wider public domain,
effectively to the world, not just to one individual.

To confirm or deny whether personal information exists in response to your
request could publicly reveal information about an individual or
individuals, thereby breaching the right to privacy afforded to persons
under the Data Protection Act 1998. When confirming or denying that
information is held would breach an individual's rights under the Data
Protection Act 1998, Section 40(5) becomes an absolute exemption, and
there is no requirement for me to provide evidence of the prejudice that
would occur, or to conduct a public interest test. However, I hope the
explanation below will help explain why 40 (5) exemption has been applied
in this case.

Person X makes an FOI request to receive all the information about the
arrest of their neighbour, Person Y. This information would not simply be
personal data, but would be classed as sensitive personal data.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, the authority can reply in four
ways:

1. They do not hold any information, so they say 'no information
held'.
2. They hold information, and they disclose it.
3. They hold information, but they recognise it is an individual's
personal data, and they apply the Section 40 (2) exemption.
4. They neither confirm nor deny that they hold the information
using Section 40(5).

If the authority responds by following either Option 1, 2 or 3, they have
breached the privacy rights of Person Y afforded to them by the Data
Protection Act. This is because they have openly revealed whether or not
Person Y has an arrest history. Under FOI, any response or disclosure is
released to the world, and this would allow other people to identify
Person Y. Responding as per either Option 1 or 2 reveals whether or not
Person Y has been arrested. In Option 3, even though the actual details of
the arrest are not disclosed (because Section 40 (2) is used to withhold
the information), by doing this, the authority has confirmed that the
information requested does exist. By exempting the information, they have
confirmed that Person Y was arrested, and in this way the authority has
breached Person Y's rights under the Data Protection Act.

Therefore, when a request for details of an arrest is received by a public
authority and the details have not already been made public, the
appropriate response for the authority to give is one that protects an
individual's rights under the Data Protection Act, in this case by neither
confirming nor denying that the information exists. This principle would
also be appropriate to requests seeking confirmation of whether
individuals are under investigation, as to indicate whether they were or
were not would similarly breach their rights to privacy.

On weighing up competing interests, I find the public interest favours the
decision to neither confirm nor deny whether the MPS holds the information
you have requested in regards to the individual Paul Philip. I believe it
is not in the public interest to confirm or deny whether we hold the
requested information, as to do so would breach the Data Protection
principles.

The MPS do acknowledge the nature of the GMC and its employees as an
important and respected organisation with a public function. We
understand that it would interest the public to know whether or not the
MPS had ever conducted an investigation into any reported wrongdoing by
GMC employees and the justifications behind our decision. However, it is
pertinent to note that the public interest is not what interests the
public but what will be of greater good, if released, to the community as
a whole. My final decision to neither confirm nor deny whether information
you have requested is held, is based on what is in the public interest and
not what is of interest to the public. Despite looking at each request
on a case-by-case basis, the MPS in this instance upholds the original
decision to neither confirm nor deny whether the information you have
requested is held.

Please let me take this opportunity to apologise for the delay in
responding to your request for an internal review.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

If you are dissatisfied with this response please read the attached paper
entitled Complaint Rights which explains how to contact the Information
Commissioner with your complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
contact me on 020 7161 3527 or at the address at the top of this letter,
quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Shannon Aldridge
Quality and Assurance Advisor
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again ***

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 40 working days.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections