Officers investigated for inappropriate use of social media

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.22.026570

I note you seek access to the following information:

Please can you provide details of how many officers have been investigated for inappropriate use of social media (broken down year on year) since 2017.

Please include Whatsapp in these figures.

Please provide where possible the nature of the allegations (in as much detail as possible), the rank of the officer, and the outcome of the investigation.

Decision

I have today decided to disclose some of the requested information. Some data has been withheld as it is exempt from disclosure and therefore this response serves as a Refusal Notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) by virtue of the following exemptions:

Section 31(1)(g) by virtue of (2)(b) – Law enforcement (Misconduct)
Section 40(2) - Personal information

Reason for decision

Section 31(1)(g) by virtue of (2)(b) Law Enforcement - In considering whether or not any further information should be disclosed, I have considered the potential harm that could be caused by any further disclosure. To release any further information into the public domain, whereby the investigation may be recent or ongoing would be detrimental and adversely impact upon the ability of the MPS to obtain information in connection with future investigations and/or inquiries

The MPS is unable to disclose any further information which has been or is being used as part of an investigation. There is a legal requirement to refrain from disclosing any further information which would place the integrity of an investigation or any future investigations at risk.

The MPS has a statutory role in establishing whether any person has failed to comply with the law. It also, in reviewing police action in specific cases, performs a key role in ascertaining whether any person is responsible for any conduct which is improper.

The release of police information that is linked to such investigations, would be likely to adversely impact upon the ability of the MPS to obtain information in connection with future investigations and/or inquiries. This would occur because those involved directly or indirectly in the investigation, would not expect the MPS to make this information publically available under the Freedom of Information Act in connection with such investigations and would erode the trust in the police service in carrying out such functions.

Section 40(2)(3)&(4) - Personal Information - is an absolute exemption which means that the legislators have identified that harm would be caused by any release. In addition there is no requirement to consider the public interest test.

A Freedom of Information Act request is not a private transaction. Under Freedom of Information, any information disclosed is released into the wider public domain, effectively to the world, not just to one individual. To disclose the requested information could publicly reveal information about an individual or individuals, thereby breaching the right to privacy afforded to persons under the Data Protection Act 1998.

The expansion in the summaries provide descriptions specific to the offences. It has been necessary to ensure an individual’s identity cannot be revealed by the information we disclose.

Such information would be internally sensitive and that there is a high likelihood of individuals being identifiable and the potential for the information to be combined with related information known to, or accessible by police officers and staff. This would be unwarranted as they would reasonably expect information relating to alleged misconduct to be held in confidence and not be disclosed for a non-law enforcement purpose.

Disclosure

Please see attached document for the requested information, which has been presented to ensure that no harm is caused to investigations by this disclosure which will include current investigations and personal information.

Please also note that the attached are complaints/conduct issues where social media has formed a part of the case and is not limited to just cases of the exchange of messages of offensive nature between officers in a closed group.