Quickly exit this site by pressing the Escape key Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.22.026584
I note you seek access to the following information:
I am requesting the roles, rank and, if possible, the names of the Operational, Tactical and Strategic (Bronze, Silver, Gold) Commanders of Operation London Bridge in the MPS.
In using Operation London Bridge, I mean the events surrounding the death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, including the processions and the funerals. Specifically, the period beginning on the 8 September 2022 to the 19 September 2022.
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 40(2)&(3) – Personal Information
Reason for decision
I consider that Section 40(2) and 40(3A)(a) is applicable in this case, as any further disclosure at this level of detail (names of officers below Chief Superintendent), 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—
(a) An identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data or an online identifier, or
(b) 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, in accordance with the first data protection principle. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) guidance provides:
‘In all circumstances, you must have an Article 6 lawful basis for processing.
There are six lawful bases for processing in Article 6, but only (a) consent or (f) legitimate interest are relevant to disclosure under FOIA or EIR.
In order to assess whether this lawful basis is engaged you need to consider three key questions:
(i) Purpose: what is the legitimate interest in disclosure of the information?
(ii) Necessity: is disclosure necessary for that purpose?
(iii) Balancing test: does the legitimate interest outweigh the interests and rights of the individual?’
Here, we need to balance the rights and freedoms of the individuals involved with any legitimate public interest in disclosure. Any further disclosure of the requested information under FOIA legislation is not necessary to meet a legitimate interest.
With this in mind, the data subjects in the circumstances of your request would have a legitimate expectation that this type of personal data would not be used for non-policing purposes (i.e. FOIA requests – disclosures for which are also placed on the MPS website Publication Scheme).
Any further disclosure in the circumstances of your request would be unlawful and would therefore contravene the first data protection principle. I have therefore applied the exemption provided under Section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act to this information as the first condition, defined in subsection (3A)(a) of Section 40 has been satisfied. This therefore, becomes an absolute exemption.
Disclosure
Please find below information pursuant to your above request:
Position | Holder | Officer Name |
Gold MPS | DAC Jane Connors | DAC Jane Connors |
Silver MPS | T/Cmdr. Karen Finlay | T/Cmdr. Karen Finlay |
Bronze 1 | Superintendent | |
Bronze 2 | Chief Supt Chief | Supt Claire Clark |
Bronze 3 | Superintendent | |
Bronze 4 | Superintendent | |
Bronze 5 | Superintendent | |
Bronze 6 | Superintendent | |
Bronze 7 | Superintendent | |
Bronze 8 | Superintendent | |
Bronze 9 | Superintendent | |
Bronze 10 | Superintendent | |
Bronze 11 | Not used | |
Bronze 12 | Superintendent | |
Bronze 13 | Superintendent | |
Bronze 14 | C/Insp | |
Bronze 15 | Chief Supt | Chief Supt Stuart Bell |
Bronze 16 | City of London | Commander Dai Evans (CoLP) |
Bronze 17 | City of London | Commander Dai Evans (CoLP) |
Bronze 18 | Superintendent | |
Bronze 19 | C/Insp | |
Bronze 20 | C/Insp | |
Bronze Marine | Inspector | |
Bronze Mounted | Inspector | |
Bronze Engagement | Commander Helen Harper | Cmdr Helen Harper |
Bronze CTC | Detective Chief Supt | D/Chief Supt David McGillicuddy |
Bronze Crime | Detective Chief Supt | D/Chief Supt Simon Messinger |
Bronze Firearms | Superintendent | |
Bronze Protection | C/Insp | |
Bronze Escort | C/Insp | |
Bronze Command & Control | Chief Supt | Chief Supt Kris Wright |
Bronze Support | Superintendent |