Arrests made by MPS Counter Terrorism officers
Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.22.023877
I note you seek access to the following information:
I am interested in more contextual data surrounding this statistic:
"One in eight counter-terrorism arrests now involves children, police said"
I would like to request a list of all counter terrorism arrests from 1 January 2017.
I would like the list to be broken down by year and give the age of each person at the time of arrest.
For each arrest I would also like to know the type of terrorism the person is being arrested in connection to (eg. far right, environmental, animal rights, islamic terrorism).
You clarified this request on 11/04/22 as follows:
Do you know what data set the police were using when they said that "One in eight counter-terrorism arrests now involves children"...?
Was it all arrests made by MPS Counter Terrorism officers or only those for Terrorism Act 2000 (TACT) offences?
I think for my purposes it might be good if you gave me a list of all arrests made by MPS Counter Terrorism officers... but for each list entry state whether the arrest was for a Terrorism Act 2000 (TACT) offence or not.
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 24(1) – National Security
- Section 31(1)(a)(b) – Law Enforcement
- Section 40(2)(3) – Personal Information
In addition, the Metropolitan Police Service can neither confirm nor deny that it holds any further information as the duty in s1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the following section:
- Section 23(5) – Information supplied by, or relating to, bodies dealing with security matters
Reason for decision
To disclose the requested list of counter-terrorism arrests would be detrimental to the MPS’s law enforcement and security operations as it would reveal force-level activity, enabling threat levels and counter-terrorism activity to be mapped across the UK. This would allow those with a criminal or extremist intent to gain an operational advantage over the MPS, and other forces, and therefore undermine the safeguarding of National Security and compromise our law enforcement functions.
To provide a breakdown of annual arrest data by age and type of extremism would also be likely to identify individuals due to the low figures realised for particular groups within this data.
Section 24 - National Security & Section 31 - Law Enforcement - The threat of terrorism cannot be ignored and it should be recognised that the international security landscape is increasingly complex and unpredictable. The UK faces a sustained threat from violent terrorists and extremists. Since 2006, the UK Government has published the threat level, based upon current intelligence and that threat is currently categorised as ‘substantial’.
The disclosure of details of all arrests by counter-terrorism officers, particularly if these were to be disclosed by a number of forces in response to such requests, would undermine the individual force Counter Terrorism Units (CTU). This would consequently be detrimental to our ability to be able to deal with the on-going terrorist threat we face. Providing the requested data would allow comparison of CTU’s across the country and enable terrorists to build a picture of what resources are in place and where they are deployed. It is felt that the disclosure of this information would prejudice the effectiveness of the national counter terrorism effort and would allow inferences to be drawn about force level CT activity.
Disclosure of more detailed information than the published national figures could allow individuals to exploit what might appear to be less active or resourced areas, by analysing patterns of police activity and deployments over time, ultimately to avoid detection. This would infer the level of CT policing resources and by analysing similar data from around the country, it would allow criminals to understand national CT policing activity. For example, it would enable terrorists to make judgments on where they perceive there to be greater vulnerability, lower staff levels and lesser probability of being apprehended in particular regions. This would ultimately increase the risk and vulnerability to the security of the UK from terrorist attack or other criminal activities.
By disclosing this information law enforcement tactics would be compromised, which would hinder the prevention and detection of terrorist crime. More crime would be committed because terrorists would know which areas had less CT capability and capacity and individuals would therefore be placed at a greater risk. A fear of crime would be realised because if terrorists identified more vulnerable areas or identified areas where there is more police activity, they would target and exploit these areas and the public would be in fear of more terrorist activity occurring. The Home Office already regularly publish national statistical data on terrorism-related arrests, including statistics relating to the ages of those arrested.
The security of the country is of paramount importance and the Police service will not divulge information if to do so would place the safety of an individual at risk or undermine National Security and Law Enforcement. Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing programmes and, in this case, providing assurance that the police service is appropriately and effectively engaging with the threat posed by extremists and terrorists, there is a very strong public interest in safeguarding both national security and the integrity of the police service in the highly sensitive area of terrorism.
Details relating to police tactics and operational procedures is of intelligence value to those with a criminal or extremist intent and therefore it is our opinion that, for these reasons, the balancing test does not fall in favour of disclosing the information requested.
Section 40 - Personal Information - 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 a list of counter-terrorism arrests, would constitute personal data which, if released, would be in breach of the rights provided by the DPA. To provide an annual breakdown of arrest data by age and types of extremism would be likely to identify individuals.
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.
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.
In addition, the Metropolitan Police Service can neither confirm nor deny that it holds any further information in relation to this request by virtue of the following exemption:
Section 23 - Information supplied by, or relating to, bodies dealing with security matters - Confirming or denying whether any additional information is held would contravene the constrictions laid out within Section 23 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in that this stipulates a generic bar on disclosure of any information, if held, that is supplied by, or concerning, certain Security Bodies.
Disclosure
Regarding the statement reported in the Daily Mail article, the statistic quoted was derived from the quarterly stats released by the Home Office on the Operation of Police Powers under the Terrorism Act 2000. These show that during the 12 months to 31 December 2021, 20 of the 186 counter-terrorism (CT) related arrests were of children under the age of 18. This relates to all counter-terrorism related arrests nationally, under both TACT and other legislation.
You will note that, although this was stated to be 1 in 8 arrests, it would be more accurate to state this was 1 in 9 arrests.
The data referred to can be found in the ‘Operation of police powers under the Terrorism Act 2000: quarterly update to December 2021: quarterly data tables’ at the following link (see tab named Q – A_10):
Operation of police powers under the Terrorism Act 2000, quarterly update to December 2021
As a gesture of goodwill, I can provide a link to additional information, outside of the Act, that may be relevant to your request. More broadly, the Home Office publish quarterly and annual national statistics that contain data on the ages of those arrested for counter-terrorism related offences over the period of your request, which can be accessed here: