Dear Mr Hai
 
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO:  13483
 
I write in connection with your request for information which was received
on 3rd February 2020.  Your request will now be considered in accordance
with the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“the Act”).
 
We will aim to provide a response to your request within 20 working days
as stipulated by the Act.  We are currently receiving an unprecedented
number of subject access and FOI requests and for the foreseeable future
we are triaging and addressing requests in the following order:  Subject
access and then FOI requests.   Every effort will be made to meet our
statutory timescales for responding.  Thank you for your understanding.
 
There may be a fee payable for the retrieval, collation and provision of
the information you request.  If this is the case you will be informed and
the 20 working day timescale will be suspended until we receive payment
from you.  If you chose not to make payment then your request will be
withdrawn.
 
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.
 
Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
contact the Information Compliance Unit quoting the reference number
above.
 
 
Yours sincerely
 
 
 
 
Sue Cale
Information Compliance Administrator
Information Compliance Unit
 
DD 01905 331545 (Ext. 2545)
 
 
 

Dear Mr Hai

 

I write in connection with your request for information received on 3^rd
February.

 

I am extending the time to provide you with a response to your request
under s.10(3) Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“the Act”) whilst West
Mercia Police considers qualified exemption(s) and the public interest
test.

 

The amended date for a response is [20 working days from initial
deadline].  Should it be necessary to extend this date further you will be
informed.

 

 

In accordance with s.17 of the Act, this acts as a Refusal Notice.  No
inference can be taken from this refusal that information does or does not
exist.

 

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

 

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
contact the Information Compliance Unit quoting the reference number
above.

 

 

Sue Cale

Information Compliance Administrator

Information Compliance Unit

 

Internal ext:  7772545

Direct Line 01905 331545

 

Dear Mr Hai

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO: 13483

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
on 3^rd February 2020. Please find below the response to your request:

 

 

I am aware that companies are selling technologies to law enforcement that
allow them to take vast quantities of personal data from cloud-based apps
and accounts. You can read more
[https://privacyinternational.org/long-re....

 

I make the following request for documents/information under the Freedom
of Information Act:

 

1. Do you use mobile phone extraction technology that includes cloud
analytics / cloud extraction capabilities e.g. Cellebrite UFED Cloud
Analyser, Magnet Axiom Cloud or Oxygen Forensics Cloud Extractor

 

2. Do you have other technologies that allow you to access cloud-based
accounts and extract this data.

 

3. Please provide a copy of the relevant Data Protection Impact
Assessment.

 

4. Please provide a copy of the relevant local and/or national
guidance/standard operating procedure/policy.

 

5. Please confirm the legal basis you rely on to conduct cloud
analytics/extraction.

            

Reply:-

Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) places two duties
on public authorities.  Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at
s1(1)(a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a
request is held.  The second duty at s1(1)(b) is to disclose information
that has been confirmed as being held.  Where exemptions are relied upon
Section 17 of the FOIA requires that we provide the applicant with a
notice which: a) states that fact; b) specifies the exemptions in question
and c) state (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the
exemption(s) applies.

 

Warwickshire Police neither confirms nor denies that it holds information
relevant to this request by virtue of the following exemptions:

 

 

Section 31 Law Enforcement

Section 24 National Security

 

Harm in confirming information is held:

 

Modern day policing is intelligence led and law enforcement depends upon
the development of intelligence and the gathering and security of evidence
in order to disrupt criminal behaviour and bring offenders to justice.  As
criminals adapt and exploit new technology, the police need to respond by
overcoming hi-tech barriers in order to meet their responsibilities.  In
this case the information relates to the extraction of data from
individuals’ mobile devices, albeit victim or offender.  By revealing
whether information is held in relation to the specific technology, will
in itself be revealing tactical information which would undermine the
process of preventing or detecting crime and the apprehension of
prosecution of offenders.  

 

Factors favouring confirming or denial – s31

 

Confirming or denying that Warwickshire Police holds information would
raise the general public’s awareness around techniques used to extract
information from mobile phones and show responsibility to delivery of
effective operational law enforcement.

 

Factors against confirming or denying – s31

 

By confirming or denying whether information is held could compromise
Warwickshire Police law enforcement capabilities and the effectiveness of
the force will be reduced. To confirm or deny if information is held could
undermine current and/or future strategies when carrying out
investigations and gathering evidence may be compromised.

 

The personal safety of individuals is of paramount importance to the
Police Service and must be considered in response of every release.  A
disclosure under Freedom of Information is a release to the world and, in
this case, confirming or denying if the information is held in relation to
gathering evidence from mobile phones, would undermine the evidence
gathering process of any investigative inquiry relating to offences, some
of which may be serious cases such as murder or rape.

 

Factors favouring confirming or denial – s24

 

Confirming or denial that any information exists relevant to the request
would lead to a better informed public and the public are entitled to know
how public funds are spent.  The information simply relates to national
security and disclosure would not actually harm it.

 

Factors against confirming or denial - S24 

 

To confirm or deny whether Warwickshire Police hold any information would
allow inferences to be made about the nature and extent of national
security related activities which may or may not take place.  This could
enable terrorist groups to take steps to avoid detection, and as such,
confirmation or denial would be damaging to national security.

 

By confirming or denying any policing arrangements of this nature would
render national security measures less effective.  This would lead to the
compromise of ongoing or future operations to protect the security or
infra-structure on the UK and increase the risk of harm to the public.

 

Balancing Test

 

As always the Freedom of Information Act has a presumption of disclosure,
unless when balancing the competing public interest factors the prejudice
to the community outweighs the benefits.  In this case, there is an
argument for confirming or denying, inasmuch as the public have a right to
know that every effort is made to gather all relevant evidence, including
extracting data from mobile phones, but this must be balanced against the
negative impact these disclosures can make.  

 

Law Enforcement is reliant on community engagement, intelligence and
evidence gathering and when it is appropriate, information is given to the
public.  What has been established in this case is the fact that
confirming or denying that information relating to technologies used when
extracting data would be harmful and have an adverse effect on the
investigative process and on the public prevention or detection of crime
and the apprehension or prosecution of offenders.  This places the victims
of such offending at a greater risk towards their health and wellbeing and
is not an action the Police Service would be willing to take.  These
negatives outweigh any tangible community benefit and therefore the
balance does not favour disclosure at this time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Every effort has been made to ensure that the information provided is as
accurate as possible

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

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please write
or telephone the Information Compliance Unit quoting the reference number
above.

Yours sincerely

 

Ms V Lewis

Information Compliance Unit
Warwickshire Police

PO Box 55

Hindlip

Worcester

WR3 8SP

01905 331545 / 331565

 

 

Warwickshire Police in complying with their statutory duty under sections
1 and 11 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to release the enclosed
information will not breach the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
However, the rights of the copyright owner of the enclosed information
will continue to be protected by law. Applications for the copyright
owner’s written permission to reproduce any part of the attached
information should be addressed to The Force Solicitor, Warwickshire
Police Headquarters, PO Box 55, Hindlip, Worcester, WR3 8SP.

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 Warwickshire Police (WP) to review their
decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the person 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
contact the person named 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 WP
made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding access
to information, you can lodge a complaint with WP to have the decision
reviewed. WP must be notified of your intention to complain within 20
working days of the date of its response to your Freedom of Information
request. Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

West Mercia Police Headquarters

Information Compliance Unit

Hindlip Hall

Hindlip

PO Box 55

Worcester

WR3 8SP

or

Email:  [email address]

In all possible circumstances, WP will aim to respond to your complaint
within 20 working days.

The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with WP 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 https://ico.org.uk/ Alternatively, phone or
write to:

Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Phone: 0303 123 1113 (local rate) or 01625 545745 if you prefer to use a
national rate number

Fax:    01625 524 510