Arrests made relating to assisting unlawful immigration from January 2018 to May 2022

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.22.025326

I note you seek access to the following information:

Could you tell me the number of arrests that were made relating to assisting unlawful immigration, facilitating entry by asylum seekers to the UK for gain, assisting entry to the UK in breach of deportation or exclusion order and assisting entry / remaining of excluded person, in the years:

- 2022 (to the nearest date to present)
- 2021
- 2020
- 2019
- 2018

Could you break down the response by offence, year and whether there was further action i.e. charged/convicted.

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 30(1)(a)(b)(c)(2) – Investigations
Section 40(2)(3A)(a) – Personal Information

Reason for decision

You have asked for the number of arrests that were made relating to assisting unlawful immigration, facilitating entry by asylum seekers to the UK for gain, assisting entry to the UK in breach of deportation or exclusion order and assisting entry / remaining of excluded person in the years 2018 to 2022, and have further asked for the data to be broken down by offence, year and whether there was further action i.e. charged/convicted.

Firstly, please be advised that the MPS do not hold conviction data, this information is held by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).

With reference to the information that we do hold and that has been located, I have made the decision to disclose the information you are seeking, however, due to extremely low figures I am unable to break some of the data down by year as you have requested. This is because extremely low figures have been identified for some offences and outcomes when broken down by year, and disclosure, if broken down by year, could identify individuals and/or cause harm to ongoing investigations. I have therefore made the decision to provide a grand total for offences and outcomes for the years 2018 to 2022, and not a yearly breakdown.

Section 30(1)(a)(b)(c)(2) – Investigations - The release of any further breakdown could impact upon ongoing investigations. The outcome for some of the offences have yet to be determined therefore, to release any further information would compromise our law enforcement investigative functions. Any disclosure, which would prejudice an ongoing investigation and therefore hinder an individual’s right to a fair trial cannot be in the public interest.

Section 40(2)(3A)(a) – Personal Information - There are six data protection principles that are set out in Section 34 of the Data Protection Act 2018. The first principle requires that the disclosure of the requested personal data must be lawful and fair. Under the Act, 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.

The requested information contains personal data that I consider exempt under the Act, for example, were we to disclose the number of offences, arrests and outcomes of investigations broken down by year and specific offence type, it is highly likely that individuals could be identified.

Having assessed the data, I have found, having considered the legitimate interest test, that disclosure of the additional requested information would not be in accordance with the first principle. Although I understand there is an interest in the information you are seeking, I believe this interest has been satisfied by the release of the disclosed information. I do not believe that providing any more details, when there is a reasonable risk that the additional information would identify individuals involved, would add to any wider public debate that may be ongoing.

Furthermore I do not think it would be fair to the individuals concerned if information was disclosed that identified them as being linked in any way to any offence. For example, a victim would not expect us to disclose the fact that they were such, and may not wish for family, or colleagues, to know they had reported a crime to police; and an individual who was later found to not be involved would be unfairly stigmatised.

Under Section 40(2) and (3) of the Act, Public Authorities are able to withhold information where its release would identify any living individual and breach the principles of the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA). I have applied this exemption in that the identity of individuals that may be realised through providing the information broken down in the format you have requested would constitute personal data which, if released, would be in breach of the rights provided by the DPA.

The six principles of the DPA govern the way in which data controllers must manage personal data. Under principle one of the DPA, personal data must be processed fairly and lawfully. I consider that providing information that identifies individuals constitutes personal data. The release of this information would be unfair as the persons concerned would have no reasonable expectation that the MPS would make this information publicly available.

In reaching my decision, I have, in each case, given due regard to the condition at Article 6(1)(a) and 6(1)(e) of the GDPR. Condition one of the GDPR requires that consideration is given to whether consent for disclosure has been given whilst Condition six requires that consideration is given to performance of a public task in the public interest.

Having considered both conditions, I have established that no consent is present or would likely be received to release this information. 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.

Disclosure

Information considered suitable for disclosure is attached. Please ensure that the data is read in conjunction with the notes page of the attached spreadsheet to ensure correct interpretation of the data provided.

Advice and Assistance

Should you wish to forward your request for information in relation to convictions to the CPS I have provided relevant contact details below:

Requests may be made by email to [email protected] or in writing to:
Information Access Team
Crown Prosecution Service
102 Petty France
London SW1H 9EA.