Dear Ms King

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2016050000693

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 17/05/2016.  I note you seek
access to the following information:

* 1)        Please advise if Radio Physics Solutions product is to be or
has been used/trialled. 2)        Please advise which product from
Radio Physics Solutions is to be or has been used/trialled. 3)      
 Please advise the dates of any use.  Specific dates or start and end
dates of trail, or expected trial. 4)        Please advise if the
Radio Physics Solutions product is to be or has been used in
conjunction with SeeQuestor. 5)        Please advise if the Radio
Physics Solutions is to be or has been used on members of the public,
if so where. 6)        Please advise the other “major UK police
forces” that are working with Radio Physics Solutions or SeeQuestor.
7)        Please advise what items, i.e. gun, suicide vest, e.t.c.,
are to be identified by the Radio Physics Solutions product. 8)      
 Please advise the successful detection rate percentage of the Radio
Physics Solutions product. 9)        Please provide privacy impact
assessment for the use of the Radio Physics Solutions product.

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.  

If you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please contact
us at [email address] or on the phone at 0207 161 3500, quoting the
reference number above. Should your enquiry relate to the logging or
allocations process we will be able to assist you directly and where your
enquiry relates to other matters (such as the status of the request) we
will be able to pass on a message and/or advise you of the relevant
contact details.

Yours sincerely

Peter Deja
Support Officer - Freedom of Information Triage Team
 
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 to discuss the
response with the case officer who dealt with your request.  

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, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Information Rights Unit
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 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.ico.org.uk.  Alternatively, write to or
phone:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 0303 123 1113

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your
communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are
here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

 

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system.  To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law.  Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents.  The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

 

Find us at:

Facebook: Facebook.com/metpoliceuk
Twitter: @metpoliceuk

Dear Ms King

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2016050000693

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 17/05/2016.  I note you seek
access to the following information:

1)        Please advise if Radio Physics Solutions product is to be or has
been used/trialled.
2)        Please advise which product from Radio Physics Solutions is to
be or has been used/trialled.
3)        Please advise the dates of any use.  Specific dates or start and
end dates of trail, or expected trial.
4)        Please advise if the Radio Physics Solutions product is to be or
has been used in conjunction with SeeQuestor.
5)        Please advise if the Radio Physics Solutions is to be or has
been used on members of the public, if so where.
6)        Please advise the other “major UK police forces” that are
working with Radio Physics Solutions or SeeQuestor.
7)        Please advise what items, i.e. gun, suicide vest, e.t.c., are to
be identified by the Radio Physics Solutions product.
8)        Please advise the successful detection rate percentage of the
Radio Physics Solutions product.
9)        Please provide privacy impact assessment for the use of the
Radio Physics Solutions product.

I am sorry to inform you that we have not been able to complete our
response to your request by the date originally stated.

Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act), we have 20 working
days to respond to a request for information unless we are considering
whether the information requested is covered by one of the 'qualified
exemptions' (exemptions which must be tested against the public interest
before deciding whether they apply to the information in question).

Where we are considering the public interest test against the application
of relevant qualified exemptions, Section 17(2)(b) provides that we can
extend the 20 day deadline.  Please see the legal annex for further
information on this section of the Act.

For your information we are considering the following exemption(s):

Section 24 National Security;
Section 30 Investigations;
Section 31 Law enforcement;

I can now advise you that the amended date for a response is 13th July
2016

May I apologise for any inconvenience caused.

Yours sincerely

Jennifer Powell
Freedom of Information Manager

LEGAL ANNEX

Section 17(2) provides:

(2) Where-

a) in relation to any request for information, a public authority is, as
respects any information, relying on a claim-
i) that any provision of Part II which relates to the duty to confirm or
deny and is not specified in section 2(3) is relevant to the request, or
ii) that the information is exempt information only by virtue of a
provision not specified in section 2(3), and
b) at the time when the notice under subsection (1) is given to the
applicant, the public authority (or, in a case falling within section
66(3) or (4), the responsible authority) has not yet reached a decision as
to the application of subsection (1)(b) or (2)(b) of section 2,
the notice under subsection (1) must indicate that no decision as to the
application of that provision has yet been reached and must contain an
estimate of the date by which the authority expects that such a decision
will have been reached.

 
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 to discuss the
response with the case officer who dealt with your request.  

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, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Information Rights Unit
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 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.ico.org.uk.  Alternatively, write to or
phone:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone:  0303 123 1113

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your
communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are
here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

 

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system.  To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law.  Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents.  The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

 

Find us at:

Facebook: Facebook.com/metpoliceuk
Twitter: @metpoliceuk

Dear Ms King

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2016050000693

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 17/05/2016.  I note you seek
access to the following information:

* 1)        Please advise if Radio Physics Solutions product is to be or
has been used/trialled.
* 2)        Please advise which product from Radio Physics Solutions is
to be or has been used/trialled.
* 3)        Please advise the dates of any use.  Specific dates or start
and end dates of trail, or expected trial.
* 4)        Please advise if the Radio Physics Solutions product is to
be or has been used in conjunction with SeeQuestor.
* 5)        Please advise if the Radio Physics Solutions is to be or has
been used on members of the public, if so where.
* 6)        Please advise the other “major UK police forces” that are
working with Radio Physics Solutions or SeeQuestor.
* 7)        Please advise what items, i.e. gun, suicide vest, e.t.c.,
are to be identified by the Radio Physics Solutions product.
* 8)        Please advise the successful detection rate percentage of
the Radio Physics Solutions product.
* 9)        Please provide privacy impact assessment for the use of the
Radio Physics Solutions product.

SEARCHES TO LOCATE INFORMATION
To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted
within the MPS.  The searches located information relevant to your
request.

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

Section 23(5) Information relating to the Security bodies;
Section 24(2) National Security;
Section 31(3) Law enforcement;

Please see the legal annex for further information on the exemptions
applied in respect of your request.

REASONS FOR DECISION
By confirming or denying that the MPS hold any information regarding Radio
Physics Solutions products would in itself disclose exempt information.
Stating information is held would confirm usage and the opposite if there
is no such information.

Any disclosure under FOIA is a disclosure to the world at large, and
confirming or denying information regarding Radio Physics Solutions
products which may or may not exist, and which (should they exist) the
police service may or may not deploy in specific circumstances would
prejudice law enforcement. If the requested information was held by the
force, confirmation of this fact would reveal that the police have access
to sophisticated security and communication techniques. This would be
damaging as it would (i) limit operational capabilities as
criminals/terrorists would gain a greater understanding of the police's
methods and techniques, enabling them to take steps to counter them; and
(ii) provide an indication to any individual who may be undertaking
criminal/terrorist activities that the police service may be aware of
their presence and taking counter terrorist measures.

Conversely, if information was not held by the force, and a denial was
issued, this would reveal to those same individuals that their activities
are unlikely to have been detected by the police. It may also suggest
(whether correctly or not) the limitations of police capabilities in this
area, which may further encourage criminal/terrorist activity by exposing
a potential vulnerability. Disclosure of the information could confirm to
those involved in criminality or terrorism that they are or have been the
subject of such activity, allowing them to gauge the frequency of its use
and to take measures to circumvent its use.  Any compromise of, or
reduction in technical capability by forces would substantially prejudice
the ability of forces to police their areas which would lead to a greater
risk to the public.  

This detrimental effect is increased if the request is made to several
different law enforcement bodies. In addition to the local criminal
fraternity now being better informed, those intent on organised crime
throughout the UK will be able to 'map' where the use of certain tactics
are or are not deployed. This can be useful information to those
committing crimes of drugs and terrorist activities.

For example, to state that no information is held in one area and then
exempt information held in another, would itself provide acknowledgement
that the technique has been used at that second location.  This could have
the likelihood of identifying location-specific operations, enabling
individuals to become aware of whether their activities have been
detected. This in turn could lead to them moving their operations,
destroying evidence, or avoiding those areas, ultimately compromising
police tactics, operations and future prosecutions.

Any information identifying the focus of policing activity could be used
to the advantage of terrorists or criminal organisations.  Information
that undermines the operational integrity of these activities will
adversely affect public safety and have a negative impact on both national
security and law enforcement.

Please note this response should not be taken as an indication of whether
or not the requested information is held.

Kind Regards

Jen Powell
Freedom of Information Manager

LEGAL ANNEX

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 in
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 the fact,
(b) specifies the exemption in question, and
(c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption
applies.

Section 23 of the Act provides:
(1)Information held by a public authority is exempt information if it was
directly or indirectly supplied to the public authority by, or relates to,
any of the bodies specified in subsection (3).

(2)A certificate signed by a Minister of the Crown certifying that the
information to which it applies was directly or indirectly supplied by, or
relates to, any of the bodies specified in subsection (3) shall, subject
to section 60, be conclusive evidence of that fact.

(3)The bodies referred to in subsections (1) and (2) are-
(a)the Security Service,
(b)the Secret Intelligence Service,
(c)the Government Communications Headquarters,
(d)the special forces,
(e)the Tribunal established under section 65 of the Regulation of
M1Investigatory Powers Act 2000,
(f)the Tribunal established under section 7 of the M2Interception of
Communications Act 1985,
(g)the Tribunal established under section 5 of the M3Security Service Act
1989,
(h)the Tribunal established under section 9 of the M4Intelligence Services
Act 1994,
(i)the Security Vetting Appeals Panel,
(j)the Security Commission,
(k)the National Criminal Intelligence Service, F1. . .
(l)the Service Authority for the National Criminal Intelligence Service.
(m)the Serious Organised Crime Agency.]

(4)In subsection (3)(c) "the Government Communications Headquarters"
includes any unit or part of a unit of the armed forces of the Crown which
is for the time being required by the Secretary of State to assist the
Government Communications Headquarters in carrying out its functions.

(5)The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that,
compliance with section 1(1)(a) would involve the disclosure of any
information (whether or not already recorded) which was directly or
indirectly supplied to the public authority by, or relates to, any of the
bodies specified in subsection (3).

Section 24 of the Act provides:
(1)Information which does not fall within section 23(1) is exempt
information if exemption from section 1(1)(b) is required for the purpose
of safeguarding national security.

(2)The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that,
exemption from section 1(1)(a) is required for the purpose of safeguarding
national security.

(3)A certificate signed by a Minister of the Crown certifying that
exemption from section 1(1)(b), or from section 1(1)(a) and (b), is, or at
any time was, required for the purpose of safeguarding national security
shall, subject to section 60, be conclusive evidence of that fact.

(4)A certificate under subsection (3) may identify the information to
which it applies by means of a general description and may be expressed to
have prospective effect.

Section 31 of the Act provides
(1)Information which is not exempt information by virtue of section 30 is
exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be
likely to, prejudice-
(a)the prevention or detection of crime,
(b)the apprehension or prosecution of offenders,
(c)the administration of justice,
(d)the assessment or collection of any tax or duty or of any imposition of
a similar nature,
(e)the operation of the immigration controls,
(f)the maintenance of security and good order in prisons or in other
institutions where persons are lawfully detained,
(g)the exercise by any public authority of its functions for any of the
purposes specified in subsection (2),
(h)any civil proceedings which are brought by or on behalf of a public
authority and arise out of an investigation conducted, for any of the
purposes specified in subsection (2), by or on behalf of the authority by
virtue of Her Majesty's prerogative or by virtue of powers conferred by or
under an enactment, or
(i)any inquiry held under the M1Fatal Accidents and Sudden Deaths
Inquiries (Scotland) Act 1976 to the extent that the inquiry arises out of
an investigation conducted, for any of the purposes specified in
subsection (2), by or on behalf of the authority by virtue of Her
Majesty's prerogative or by virtue of powers conferred by or under an
enactment.

(2)The purposes referred to in subsection (1)(g) to (i) are-

(a)the purpose of ascertaining whether any person has failed to comply
with the law,
(b)the purpose of ascertaining whether any person is responsible for any
conduct which is improper,
(c)the purpose of ascertaining whether circumstances which would justify
regulatory action in pursuance of any enactment exist or may arise,
(d)the purpose of ascertaining a person's fitness or competence in
relation to the management of bodies corporate or in relation to any
profession or other activity which he is, or seeks to become, authorised
to carry on,
(e)the purpose of ascertaining the cause of an accident,
(f)the purpose of protecting charities against misconduct or mismanagement
(whether by trustees or other persons) in their administration,
(g)the purpose of protecting the property of charities from loss or
misapplication,
(h)the purpose of recovering the property of charities,
(i)the purpose of securing the health, safety and welfare of persons at
work, and
(j)the purpose of protecting persons other than persons at work against
risk to health or safety arising out of or in connection with the actions
of persons at work.

(3)The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that,
compliance with section 1(1)(a) would, or would be likely to, prejudice
any of the matters mentioned in subsection (1).

Factors favouring confirming or denying whether any other information is
held for Section 24
The public is entitled to know where their public funds are being spent
and a better informed public can take steps to protect themselves.

Factors against confirming or denying whether any other information is
held for Section 24
By confirming or denying the use of specialist techniques could render
security measures less effective. This could lead to the compromise of
ongoing or future operations to protect the security or infra-structure of
the UK and increase the risk of harm to the public

Factors favouring confirming or denying whether any other information is
held for Section 31
Better awareness may reduce crime or lead to more information from the
public, and the public would be able to take steps to protect themselves.

Factors against confirming or denying whether any other information is
held for Section 31
By confirming or denying whether such techniques were used would
compromise law enforcement tactics and undermine the partnership approach
which would hinder the prevention or detection of crime. This would impact
on police resources, more crime would then be committed and individuals
placed at risk.

Balance test
The security of the country is of paramount importance and the MPS will
not divulge whether information is or is not held if to do so could
undermine National Security or compromise law enforcement. Whilst there is
a public interest in the transparency of policing operations, there is a
very strong public interest in safeguarding both national security and the
integrity of police investigations and operations in this area.  

As much as there is public interest in knowing that policing activity is
appropriate and balanced in matters of national security this will only be
overridden in exceptional circumstances.

There is also no requirement to satisfy any public concern over the
legality of police operations and the tactics we may or may not use.
Forces are already held to account by statute, for example the Police and
Criminal Evidence Act and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act and
independent bodies such as Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary, the
Independent Police Complaints Commission and the Office of the
Surveillance Commissioner. Our accountability is therefore not enhanced by
confirming or denying whether any information is held.

Therefore it is our opinion that for these issues the balancing test for
confirming or denying whether any information is held regarding these
Radio Physics Solutions products  is not made out. This argument is
obviously transferable to all police tactics.

None of the above can be viewed as an inference that the information you
seek does or does not exist.

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 to discuss the
response with the case officer who dealt with your request.  

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, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Information Rights Unit
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 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.ico.org.uk.  Alternatively, write to or
phone:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone:  0303 123 1113

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your
communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are
here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

 

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system.  To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law.  Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents.  The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

 

Find us at:

Facebook: Facebook.com/metpoliceuk
Twitter: @metpoliceuk