J9 FOI Secretariat
Permanent Joint Headquarters (United Kingdom)
Northwood Headquarters
Sandy Lane
Northwood
Middlesex
HA6 3HP
E-Mail
: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx
Reference: FOI 2017/11396
Ms R Curling
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
21 March 2018
Dear Ms Curling,
Thank you for your emails of the 10 and 12 November 2017 requesting the following
information:
“A copy of the current UK policy relating to the investigation of intimidation case reported
by current or former locally employed staff in Afghanistan.
I also request answers to the questions below which are based-upon to the information at
this link - https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
3A__modmedia.blog.gov.uk_2015_08_21_hmg-2Dpolicy-2Don-2Dafghan-
2Dinterpreters_&d=DwICaQ&c=SpkS68ZihjmrPEDEws428g&r=buZlIDtB7LlPtIhdgxQR0w&
m=fYhPLmH-c5oAxtjdCh2Y14RrQy9pqHKdsWgZfCAQAkw&s=ZYRCJgxL-
KFneWQgjDoG3yAO1e09QhmjoWW39Vrv2m4&e=
Is the expert team mentioned in the link above still in Afghanistan?
If so, how many members make up this team and what are their job titles and specific
roles?
It is described as an expert team, what qualifies the team members as experts in the field
of investigating the intimidation of locally employed staff in Afghanistan?
How many cases has the team investigated since 1 January 2016?
How were those cases resolved? Please give a breakdown of how the cases were resolved
(number resolved by security advice, relocation within Afghanistan, relocation to the UK,
other (please specify))
The link mentions bespoke security advice. Of those individuals' cases that were resolved
with security advice, how many were given bespoke advice and how many were given
general security advice?
After assistance to relocate within Afghanistan or security advice has been provided at the
end of the process, what checks are in place to ensure that the assistance provided has
been successful and that the individual has not been killed?
During what hours is telephone number 0792 907 303 monitored by a member of the
team?
How many members does a Theatre Intimidation Assessment Review Panel (TIARP) have
and what are their roles and experience in investigating intimidation?
What documents of policy does the Theatre Intimidation Assessment Review Panel (TIARP)
refer to when making its decision? I would like to see those documents.”
We are treating your correspondence as a request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
A search for the information has now been completed within the Ministry of Defence, and we
can confirm that some information in scope of your request is held.
The information you have requested can be found below, but some of the information falls
entirely within the scope of the qualified exemptions provided for at section 31 (Law
Enforcement) and section 38 (Health and Safety) of the FOIA and has been withheld.
Q1: A copy of the current UK policy relating to the investigation of intimidation case reported by
current or former locally employed staff in Afghanistan. A copy of the current UK Intimidation policy for current or former locally employed staff in
Afghanistan has been enclosed. Some of the information within this document falls under
section 31 (Law Enforcement) and has been redacted.
Q2: Is the expert team mentioned in the link above still in Afghanistan? Yes, the Intimidation Investigation Unit is based in Afghanistan.
Q3: If so, how many members make up this team and what are their job titles and specific roles? The team currently consists of the following personnel: -
x 1 Staff Officer Grade 1 (SO1) LEC Policy
x 1 Investigation Officer
x 1 Military Linguist, who speaks Dari
x 1 Military Linguist, who speaks Pashtu
The SO1 advises on LEC policy. The Investigation Officer investigates the claims and is assisted
by the two Military Linguists, who provide translation services. In addition, the team are also
supported by other teams in Afghanistan and the UK, consisting of both military and civilian
personnel in relevant areas of expertise.
Q4: It is described as an expert team, what qualifies the team members as experts in the field of
investigating the intimidation of locally employed staff in Afghanistan? The Investigation Officer is a qualified police investigator who has either been seconded from
Home Office constabularies, or is a member of the Ministry of Defence Police force. The
Military Linguists are trained translators and have qualified to a required standard of Dari and
Pashtu allowing them to talk fluently and translate documents accurately. Their training also
provides them with a cultural awareness that assists in some aspects of the investigation into
intimidation cases.
Q5: How many cases has the team investigated since 1 January 2016? The information requested can be found at Annex A.
Q6: How were those cases resolved? Please give a breakdown of how the cases were resolved
(number resolved by security advice, relocation within Afghanistan, relocation to the UK, other
(please specify))
The information requested can be found at Annex A.
Q7: The link mentions bespoke security advice. Of those individuals' cases that were resolved
with security advice, how many were given bespoke advice and how many were given general
security advice? All individuals who report intimidation are given general security advice regardless of how
their case is measured. Each case is assessed on its merit and when the general security advice
is deemed insufficient then additional bespoke advice tailored to the intimidation the
individual is reporting is provided. We do not record figures for the bespoke advice that is
provided.
Q8: After assistance to relocate within Afghanistan or security advice has been provided at the
end of the process, what checks are in place to ensure that the assistance provided has been
successful and that the individual has not been killed? Unless a Locally Employed Civilian (LEC) raises a claim of intimidation, or is eligible for the Ex-
Gratia Redundancy Scheme, we do not routinely contact them. LECs are asked not to publicise
their employment with Her Majesty’s Government, and we would not wish to do so by
contacting them unnecessarily. If an LEC raises an intimidation claim, we contact them
through an agreed telephone number. They are told when progress is made on their case,
and encourage them to contact us at any time if they want to raise further intimidation claims.
Of those LECs we have kept in contact with, none have been killed.
Q9: During what hours is telephone number 0792 907 303 monitored by a member of the
team? The intimidation telephone number is used for reporting intimidation that has already
occurred. It is monitored seven days a week when the IIU team is in the office. Usual office
hours (which can vary) are 8am to 7pm. Former LECs are advised to contact the Afghan
National Police if there is an immediate threat to their safety.
Q10: How many members does a Theatre Intimidation Assessment Review Panel (TIARP) have
and what are their roles and experience in investigating intimidation? The Theatre Intimidation Assessment Review Panel (TIARP) is made up of four members:
The Civil Secretary, who is the authority within Theatre for all claims of intimidation
and ensures adherence to the policy and process for dealing with allegations of
intimidation. They chair and make decisions on the TIARP, and make decisions on
the granting of interim payments to LECs in line with their approved financial
delegation.
The SO1 LEC Policy, who provides advice to the TIARP on the relevant policy.
A Legal Advisor, who provides legal advice and guidance to the TIARP.
An independent Liaison Officer (currently Danish), who provides an assurance
mechanism that decisions are made fairly.
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office and/or Department for International Development
may also provide a panel member if the LEC has primarily been employed by their department.
The Investigating Officer, presents the case to panel members.
The members of the TIARP do not investigate the alleged intimidation, the role of the panel is
to provide an assessment of the evidence that has been gathered through the investigation
process, and if required, decide what measures might best be applied to assist the LEC.
Q11: What documents of policy does the Theatre Intimidation Assessment Review Panel (TIARP)
refer to when making its decision? I would like to see those documents. Please find enclosed a copy of the British Forces Standing Operation Instruction 802:
Procedure for Handling Allegations by Locally Employed Civilian (LEC) of Intimidation. Some
of the information within this document falls under section 31 (Law Enforcement) and section
38 (Health and Safety) and has been redacted.
Sections 31 and 38 are qualified exemptions and are subject to public interest testing which
means that the information requested can only be withheld if the public interest in doing so
outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
Section 31 has been applied to some of the information within the two enclosed documents
(see answer to questions 1 and 11) because it contains details which could prejudice the
capability and effectiveness of intimidation investigations and allow the potential for LECs to
make fraudulent claims. The balance of public interest was found to be in favour of
withholding the information, given that overall, the public interest is best served in not
releasing this information to prevent MOD funds and/or services being misappropriated. The
level of prejudice against release of the exempted information has been set at the higher level
of “would” rather than “would be likely to”.
Section 38(1) has been applied to some of the information in the second enclosed document
(see answer to question 11) because it contains details which would cause a security risk for
LECs, the balance of public interest was found to be in favour of withholding the information,
given that overall, the public interest is best served in not releasing security advice provided to
LECs as doing so could endanger the LECs and their families’ safety. The level of prejudice
against release of the exempted information has been set at the higher level of “would” rather
than “would be likely to”.
The material disclosed should allow a good understanding of the schemes notwithstanding
the redactions.
If you have any queries regarding the content of this letter, please contact this office in the
first instance.
If you wish to complain about the handling of your request, or the content of this response,
you can request an independent internal review by contacting the Information Rights
Compliance team, Ground Floor, MOD Main Building, Whitehall, SW1A 2HB (e-mai
l CIO-FOI-
xx@xxx.xxx.xx). Please note that any request for an internal review should be made within
40 working days of the date of this response.
If you remain dissatisfied following an internal review, you may raise your complaint directly to
the Information Commissioner under the provisions of Section 50 of the Freedom of
Information Act. Please note that the Information Commissioner will not normally investigate
your case until the MOD internal review process has been completed. The Information
Commissioner can be contacted at: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water
Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF. Further details of the role and powers of the Information
Commissioner can be found on the Commissioner's website
at https://ico.org.uk/. Yours sincerely,
PJHQ J9 FOI Secretariat
Annex A to
FOI 2017/11396
Dated 21 March 2018
Intimidation Investigation Unit Case Summary
Jan 2016 – Nov 2017
New
Re-opened
Ex
White
Green
Amber
Withdrawn
Claims
Claims
Committee
2016
Jan
11
9
2
10
0
0
0
Feb
3
6
0
10
6
1
0
Mar
6
5
3
10
2
0
0
Apr
2
4
2
0
0
0
0
May
7
9
4
12
2
0
0
Jun
2
7
0
0
0
0
1
Jul
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
Aug
4
3
4
0
0
0
0
Sep
2
5
1
20
1
1
0
Oct
3
8
1
0
0
0
0
Nov
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
Dec
2
5
0
17
0
0
0
2017
Jan
2
6
0
6
1
0
0
Feb
5
3
2
6
0
0
0
Mar
8
4
2
6
0
0
0
Apr
2
6
5
0
0
0
0
May
3
5
1
6
0
0
0
Jun
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
Jul
8
14
13
11
0
0
0
Aug
7
3
3
9
0
0
0
Sep
1
6
3
4
0
0
0
Oct
2
6
3
0
0
0
0
Nov1
2
6
3
6
0
0
0
1 As at 28 Nov 17.