A copy of the project Alpha Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.22.022075
I note you seek access to the following information:
I would like to request a copy of the project Alpha Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA), which is mentioned in the pdf that was went to me as part of the response to Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 01/FOI/21/021572.
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)(a)(b)– Law enforcement Section 40(2)(3A) – Personal Information
Reason for decision
Section 31(1)(a)(b) - LAW ENFORCEMENT - Disclosure of any further information in regards to your request would cause operational harm to the MPS and affect our ability to fulfil our core function of law enforcement. The release of such information would reveal tactical operational information which would be to the detriment of providing an efficient policing service and a failure in providing a duty of care to all members of the public.
Disclosure of any further information would hinder the ability of the MPS to police effectively in preventing crime and harm to others involving potentially serious violence if the public become aware of the tactics, resources and capabilities available to the MPS. This is particularly so if the public are aware of what type of tactics, intelligence and resources the MPS are likely to have available and use, as it also indicates what capabilities and resources they do not have and decisions they may take to overcome the violence used or threatened, by those wishing to cause harm.
It is not in the public interest to disclose any further information as it would in effect, reveal law enforcement tactics and resources used to respond to such policing matters. Such a disclosure would also have an adverse effect, by assisting those planning to commit acts of violence.
Disclosure of the type of capabilities available to the police at a specific point in time would enable those individuals intent on committing criminal activity to circumvent methods used to prevent crime and apprehend offenders. This in turn hinders the ability of the MPS to carry out its core functions in law enforcement.
Disclosure of any further information would also place the public at greater risk of harm, if would-be criminals were provided with such information which is clearly related to policing capabilities.
Section 40(2)&(3) - PERSONAL INFORMATION - I consider that Section 40(2) and 40(3A)(a) is applicable in this case, as disclosure of the names of individuals, as would be contained within the document being requested, would breach the 1st data protection principle that requires personal data to be processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner in relation to individuals.
There is no presumption of disclosure in relation to ‘personal data’ which is defined as: ‘any information relating to an identified or identifiable living individual’
“Identifiable living individual” means a living individual who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to— an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data or an online identifier, or one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of the individual.’
For such disclosure to be lawful, it would be necessary to satisfy a condition within Article 6 of the GDPR. Article 6 sets out the six lawful bases, applying to all processing; one of which must be in place in every case of disclosure of personal data under FOIA, in accordance with the First Data Protection Principle.
I am satisfied that the disclosure of personal data as would be contained within the requested information would be unwarranted in the circumstances of this request. This is because the disclosure of this personal data is not necessary to satisfy the legitimate public interest and in relation to personal data, there is no presumption of disclosure. Furthermore, none of the conditions specified within Article 6 of the GDPR would be met.
The harm and public interest considerations in this case will be similar to your recent request for the Equalities Impact Assessment report for the Project Alpha Social Media Hub under reference 01/FOI/21/021572.
I have today decided to disclose to you the requested document, which has been redacted in part, by the removal of personal information such as names and any information deemed harmful to the law enforcement functions of the MPS.
Please see attached document which has been redacted in part by virtue of section 31(1)(a)(b)– Law enforcement and s.40(2)(3A) – Personal Information.
Please note that the first page redaction refers to the Protective Marking of the document, which are no longer relevant as the document has been disclosed under the FOIA. Additionally, markings on the first page are deemed not relevant to this request.