Al Quds March on 19 June 2017 in London

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.22.025640

I note you seek access to the following information:

I ask about the Al Quds March on 19 June 2017 in London, in particular the delay caused as a group of 30 or so Zionists blocked the route. I ask about any notification in advance that the blocking action was about to take place, and any information at the time (from police day books and police videos) and any internal reviews if such exist.

I do not know what information does exist, but if an internal review exists that would be useful.

For further information: Video footage here (see around 14 minutes especially) -
(356) Al Quds March London 2017 (Raw Footage) - YouTube

This shows police with collar signs *REDACTED * The blocking took place at Scribbler - not sure which store. Those involved in the action (holding Israeli flags) may include members of the Israeli Advocacy Movement including * NAMES REDACTED *. If appropriate, please detail the role of such groups/ people in your reply.”

Clarification-
“Further to this foi (typo Quds not Wuds)
A similar disruption for about 30 minutes took place in Oxford Street London, November 4th 2017, involving the same disruptors. This time the march was for the PSC (Palestine Solidarity Campaign), in the afternoon.

I ask about police reviews etc. on this disruption, and whether the police were notified in advance.”

Clarification-
“Further to this foi I ask for any reviews of the 2018 Al Quds, especially a disruption around 52 Curzon Street (Cafe Nero, intersection of Half Moon Street), 10 June. Several mounted police and around 20 officers on foot had to move a group of Zionists blocking the march.

What information does MetPol have? For example, the legality of the blocking, the cost of this particular incident and so on.”

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 40(5B)(a)(i) – Personal Information

Reason for decision

Section 40(5B)(a)(i) – Personal Information - Section 40 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 is designed to address information that is covered by the Data Protection Act 2018.

Under section 40(5), the MPS is not required to comply with the requirements of section 1(1) (a) i.e. the duty to inform the applicant whether or not the information is held.

In most cases Personal Data is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act as I will explain below.

Providing an answer in confirmation or denial that information is held in relation to an individual or individuals would accordingly, reveal personal data and be in breach of the general right to privacy provided by the Data Protection Act 2018. For this reason, this notice accordingly does not confirm nor deny whether any crimes have been reported and represents a refusal under Section 40(5) of the Act.

Section 40(5) of the Act is an absolute class based exemption. In claiming this exemption, there is no requirement to consider whether confirming or denying whether information is held is in the public interest.

• Section 40(5B)(a)(i) – Personal Information

The MPS can Neither Confirm nor Deny that any information is held in relation to the named individuals on your request as to do so would breach the right to privacy afforded to persons under the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA) and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

A Freedom of Information Act request is not a private transaction and both the request itself, and any information disclosed, is considered suitable for open publication; any information disclosed is released into the wider public domain, and effectively to the world, and not just to one individual

Where an individual is requesting third party personal data the MPS must ensure that any action taken adheres to the principles of the Data Protection Act 2018 and the GDPR. To clarify, the Freedom of Information Act only allows disclosure of personal data if that disclosure would be compliant with the principles for processing personal data. These principles are outlined under section 34 of the DPA 2018 and under Article 5 of the GDPR. Section 40(5B)(a)(i) of the Act, which provides an exemption for personal information, has therefore been applied to neither confirm nor deny that any information is or is not held.

Section 16 - Duty to advise and Assist

Where an individual is requesting his or her own personal data the information is always exempt. Such information can be requested under other legislation (please see below).

Please note: If the information requested relates to you (for example if you are seeking a crime report where you were the victim/witness/suspect) then you are able to request it via a Subject Access Request. In order to make a Subject Access Request please complete form 3019 (available from any MPS Station, or by calling 020 7161 3500 available Mon - Fri between 10:00 and 14:00). Please note that proof of identification may be required to process a request. This process may also take up to one month (30 calendar days) from receipt of your completed application.

Disclosure

You have asked for information in relation to Al Quds marches/protests held between June 2017 and June 2018, most specifically whether the MPS received advance notification of any action taken.

We were not informed in advance of the intention to protest at those locations at those times.

The use of the highway for protest has been held to be a lawful use in case law. The same right to assemble and use the highway for protest applied to those attending the Al Quds demonstrations, and those who attended counter demonstrations. The police are obliged under the European Convention on Human Rights not to interfere in those rights unless there is a lawful power to do so, and it is reasonable, proportionate and necessary. In some cases we are obliged to protect those rights. In each of these protests, police assessed the actions of both protest groups. Police officers were deployed at points to engage with both protest groups, to assess whether offences were being committed, and to prevent a breach of the peace.