Policies, procedures and metrics in relation to receipts of torture

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.22.023068

I note you seek access to the following information:

This letter is a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act. One recalls the laws against torture, inhuman treatment and degrading treatment (‘torture etc’), including and specifically:
 Magna Carta,
 English common law against torture (confirmed e.g in A v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2004), (2005), (UKHL 71);
 The laws per the European Convention of Human Rights & European Rights Act 1998,
 The Criminal Justice Act 1988,
 The UK’s international treaty obligations against torture (UNCAT, ICCPR etc)

1. The policies and procedures, including all pertinent flowcharts, checklists and forms, that apply when information about torture etc. is received, including the timescales and other performance indicators.

2. How many such reports have been received in the past five years.

3. In how many of the cases received in the past five years have the policies and procedures not been followed.

4. What measures are in place against the risk that senior officials in your organisation are just turning a blind eye to reports of torture etc. that are received, including the risk that senior officials might be trying hard not to know about reports of torture etc. Whether there is a policy of ignoring information about torture that are deemed to be “just the occasional, isolated case,” or something of the kind.

5. What training have your staff had within the past three years that has aimed at ensuring they each understand their obligations in respect of information or allegations of torture etc.; what was the syllabus and the written aims of the training, who delivered it, and please may I have a copy of the training materials.

6. Where the information or allegation of torture concerns another public body, the policy and procedures for liaison with them about it.

7. Copies of documents that show what measures that are aimed at ensuring torture does not happen and specifically that the police cannot be played for fools (e.g. as Carl Beech seems to played the Metropolitan Police in Operation Midland) and used as a torturous instrument, together with copies of the corresponding policies and procedures.

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 43(2) – Commercial sensitivity

Reason for decision

Section 43(2) of the Commercial Interests - Information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person (including the public authority holding it).

In order for the exemption provided under Section 43(2) to be engaged in this case, the MPS must demonstrate that disclosure under the Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person. In this case, we are relying on the lower threshold of 'would be likely to'. This exemption has been applied as disclosure of some of the information requested such as materials, information on who delivered it or the syllabus are subject to commercial confidentiality and as such, revealing this level of information would be likely to have a prejudicial impact upon the commercial interest of the MPS.

Any information that can be used by competitors to inform future business decisions, could significantly impact the position of our contractors and will not be released.

Companies contracting with the MPS would have no reasonable expectation that specific information that is considered to be sensitive will be shared with the public or competing companies. Certain details could be of a competitive or strategic advantage during future tenders. It is predominantly our contractors who would be most directly prejudiced by the disclosure of the information, however, it could also prove detrimental to the relationship between the MPS and our contractors and suppliers and may, as a result, damage the bargaining position of the MPS.

Ultimately the disclosure of this information would have the potential to damage business confidence and cause harm to the commercial interests of the MPS which in turn, may impact upon the procurement of similar services in the future, as companies would be less willing to share details with the MPS through fear of disclosure under the Act.

In the event that our current contractors were to terminate their relationship with the MPS, we would have to seek out new contractors and renegotiate terms. By narrowing the range of those that would work with us, we may be forced to use less preferable companies. This could subsequently lead to us having to procure less suitable services or utilise public funds in a less efficient manner.

The information that has been disclosed demonstrates our commitment to transparency and openness in the process

Disclosure

Q1 - The policies and procedures, including all pertinent flowcharts, checklists and forms, that apply when information about torture etc. is received, including the timescales and other performance indicators.

There is no specific policy dedicated to the investigation of Torture. Timescales for investigating allegations of torture should, like any other crime be conducted expeditiously and diligently, however there is no proscribed time limit. Allegations of torture are initially scoped in accordance with the agreed SO15 / CPS Scoping guidelines for war crimes, crimes against humanity and torture. This information is already available in the public domain and I have included a link for your reference: https War Crimes Against Humanity Referral Guidelines

Q2 - How many such reports have been received in the past five years.

Five (5) allegations of torture have been recorded on CRIS since 2017, three (3) of which were referrals to the War Crimes team. The team received a further three (3) referrals in 2021, however, following review, these were not recorded as crimes.

Q3 - In how many of the cases received in the past five years have the policies and procedures not been followed.

Where an allegation is clearly made out, all allegations of torture have been allocated to scope the prospect of opening an investigation.

Q4 - What measures are in place against the risk that senior officials in your organisation are just turning a blind eye to reports of torture etc. that are received, including the risk that senior officials might be trying hard not to know about reports of torture etc. Whether there is a policy of ignoring information about torture that are deemed to be “just the occasional, isolated case,” or something of the kind.

Allegations of torture can be made to Police in person at any police station, by dialling 101 or by reporting on the Metropolitan Police website.

Q5 - What training have your staff had within the past three years that has aimed at ensuring they each understand their obligations in respect of information or allegations of torture etc.; what was the syllabus and the written aims of the training, who delivered it, and please may I have a copy of the training materials.

The Section 43 Exemption applies to this question as the MPS is unable to release training materials or information on who delivered training or provide any training syllabus as this is subject to commercial confidentiality and as such, revealing this level of information would be likely to have a prejudicial impact upon the commercial interest of the MPS. We can advise, however, that all officers on the War Crimes team are detective constables who have undertaken MPS training to be detectives.

Depending on the length of service, all detectives will have completed a National Investigators Exam, an initial Investigators course (PIP2) and completed PIP2 workbook requirements and probation. Detectives on the War Crimes team will also complete a two-week War Crimes Investigators course provided by an external provider.

Q6 - Where the information or allegation of torture concerns another public body, the policy and procedures for liaison with them about it.

There is no specific training course for investigating an offence of torture.

Q7 - Copies of documents that show what measures that are aimed at ensuring torture does not happen and specifically that the police cannot be played for fools (e.g. as Carl Beech seems to played the Metropolitan Police in Operation Midland) and used as a torturous instrument, together with copies of the corresponding polices and procedures.

The MPS has no knowledge of the existence of any such material.