Status of Bolan incident files

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.21.022114

I note you seek access to the following information:

Could you tell me the 'status' of the Met's file on the Bolan incident please. Is it listed as Active or Closed and if Closed is there a date when it was officially Closed.

On the 4 January 2022, you wrote to me and stated:

Once you have confirmed the Status of the file to me, would it be possible to have a photograph of it (closed of course) please.

Decision

I have today decided to disclose some of the requested information. The requested file cover have been provided to you. Please find this file cover/image enclosed with this notice. The file cover contains personal information and other operational information. This information has been withheld by virtue of the following provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act). 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 - Law Enforcement
Section 40 - Personal data

Reason for decision

Section 40(2)&(3) - Personal Information: - Section 40(2)(a)(b) of the Act provides that any information to which a request for information relates, is exempt information if the first condition of Section 40(3A)(a) is satisfied. The first condition of Section 40(3A)(a) states that personal information is exempt if its disclosure would contravene any of the data protection principles. If the disclosure of the requested personal data would not contravene the data protection principles, the disclosure must also not contravene Sections 3A(b) and 3B of the Act.

There are six principles that are set out in Article 5(1)(a) of the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) that dictate when the processing of personal data is lawful. The first principle requires that any processing of personal data must be lawful, fair and transparent. Under Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR, the disclosure of personal data is considered to be lawful if:

a. There is a legitimate interest in the disclosure of that personal data.
b. The disclosure of the personal data is necessary to meet that legitimate interest.
c. The disclosure would not cause unwarranted harm to the data subject.

Having considered your request I have found, having given regard to the legitimate interest, that:

a. The public release of this information would satisfy a legitimate interest; being to provide a complete disclosure in respect of a request for information about the death of Marc Bolan.

b. The disclosure of this information is necessary to meet the legitimate interest identified at point a above.

c. Any living person mentioned on a police file, in any capacity (i.e. police employee, former police employee or other), would not reasonably expect the police to disclose their personal data in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. In this regard, I have found that the release and publication of this personal data would be unexpected and distressing to the named persons. I have accordingly refused to provide this personal data on the basis that disclosure would cause unwarranted harm to the data subjects.

The provision to refuse access to information under Section 40(2)(a)(b) and (3A)(a) of the Act is both absolute and class based. When this exemption is claimed, it is accepted that harm would result from disclosure. There is accordingly no requirement to demonstrate what that harm may be in refusing access to information.

Section 31(1)(a)&(b) - Law Enforcement - Section 31(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provides that any information is exempt if its disclosure under the Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the prevention or detection of crime and/or the apprehension or prosecution of offenders.

This request seeks access to the status of the file/investigation into the death of Marc Bolan. In requesting access to a photograph/image of the police file, information has also been sought that is operational (i.e. the file cover displays whether the file has been put away at any stage, reviewed and/or when it is has been recalled and by whom). Police investigations are, by their nature, confidential and the information recorded during the course of each investigation, is typically only disclosed to further the investigation or any related criminal proceedings. In this case, to release details of the file’s/investigation’s status would make operational information about this police investigation available to the public. This information was recorded and retained solely for the explicit purpose of a police investigation. The disclosure of this type of sensitive information would be contrary to purpose for which it held and importantly, would be likely to make it more difficult to manage police investigations. This would occur as the disclosure of operational material about police investigations, in a piecemeal fashion under the Act, this would be likely to undermine the integrity/confidentiality of the investigative process, which would in turn undermine confidence in the process of police investigations. This would be ultimately be harmful to the Met’s ability to investigate which would be contrary to the public interest.

When a request for information is made, I must determine whether exemptions should be claimed and in the case of exemptions that are qualified, establish whether release is in the public interest. Having considered your request, I have chosen to claim Section 31 (Law Enforcement) of the Act, in view of the fact that the status of the file/investigation into the death of Marc Bolan is operational material. Additionally, the image of the police file contains information that is operational.

Having identified and considered the factors relevant to the public interest, I have carefully examined the importance of transparency with the general public. The MPS is committed to transparency with the general public and recognises that greater transparency is likely to improve public confidence in the MPS. For this reason, I have attached particular weight to this public interest factor.

In assessing your request, I have also evaluated the harm that release of the requested information would be likely to cause. Police investigations are, by their nature, confidential. Having considered the information requested, I have found that releasing the file’s/investigation’s status and an unredacted image of the file, displaying whether the file has been put away at any stage, reviewed and/or when it is has been recalled and by whom, would make operational information about this police investigation available to the public. This would be likely to undermine the integrity/confidentiality of the investigative process, which would in turn undermine confidence in the process of police investigations. This would ultimately be harmful to the Met’s ability to investigate. For this reason, a redacted copy of the file cover has been provided with the entire sections related to whether the file has been recalled, reviewed and/or put away at any stage being removed. On balance, I believe that the public interest factors identified supporting refusing to release the operational material associated with this file. For this reason, I have refused these parts of your request for information.

Disclosure

Please find this file cover/image enclosed with this notice. The file cover contains personal information and other operational information.