MEPO 3/1577

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.22.024434

I note you seek access to the following information:

Please may I request access to MEPO 3/1577, a record from 1922-1924 which has been retained by the Metropolitan Police Service.

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 23 - Information supplied by, or concerning, certain security bodies
Section 30 - Investigations and proceedings conducted by public authorities
Section 31 - Law enforcement
Section 38 - Health and Safety

Reason for decision

To disclose some documentation contained within MEPO 3/1577 would be highlighting the nature of enquiries conducted to identify persons of interest to the MPS, as well as how and where intelligence is recorded. Additionally, it would also highlight information from, as well as the identity of, confidential sources. These are exempt by virtue of Section 30(2)(b) and Section 31(1)(a)(b) of the Act.

In addition, exemption Section 23(1) has been applied to prevent disclosure of information that would reveal the extent of any involvement of the security bodies.

Section 38(1)(a)(b) has been applied on the basis that disclosure could cause unnecessary suffering both mentally and physically to the family of the individuals charged, the deceased and any witnesses, along with potentially placing named witnesses families in potential danger.

FOIA is considered to be a release to the world as once the information is published the public authority, in this case the MPS, has no control over what use is made of that information.

To release information, which highlights the type of enquiries likely to have been conducted to identify persons of interest, would allow those with a criminal or extremist intent to understand the type of information gathered to be pertinent to a police investigation. In addition, disclosure would highlight how and where intelligence is recorded. To provide this information would allow others to have a greater understanding of where information of a particular nature might be located, which could undermine the law enforcement process.

Disclosure would be harmful to future investigations and policing in general, if details around police techniques were disclosed. Some of the investigative tactics employed during the 1920s are still applicable to present day policing. By disclosing these details would allow members of the public to define and identify the investigative tactics used by the MPS when undertaking operations of this type.

The MPS is charged with enforcing the law, preventing and detecting crime and protecting the communities we service. There remains the possibility that the current or future law enforcement role of the MPS may be compromised by the releasing of information relating to investigative tactics. Modern-day policing is intelligence led and information of this nature needs to be treated with extreme sensitivity as it could have a detrimental effect on the operational effectiveness of the MPS. There are significant risks associated with providing information in relation to any aspects of an investigation, whether it be historical or current. To provide such details would reveal how investigations are carried out, which would provide criminals of today with an insight to how the police operate, and people who wish to harm the citizens of London with the opportunity of disrupting police activity.

This could be to the detriment of providing an efficient policing service and a failure in providing a duty of care to all members of the public. It might require the MPS to have to increase the amount of officers available to them thus increasing the cost to the public purse.

Additionally, releasing certain information could place the family of any witnesses at risk from relevant organisations. It could also cause unnecessary suffering both mentally and physically to the family of the individuals charged, the deceased as well as any witnesses named.

Section 23 - Information supplied by, or concerning, certain security bodies &
Section 30 - Investigations and proceedings conducted by public authorities - Disclosing information which has been obtained in confidence could prevent others from coming forward to give valuable evidence. If it were believed that the MPS were unwilling to protect the anonymity of an individual, the public would be unwilling to provide assistance. The MPS would not wish to reveal who, what and when intelligence is recorded as this would clearly undermine the law enforcement process. This would impact on police resources and more crime and terrorist incidents would be committed, placing individuals at risk.

Section 31 - Law enforcement - By disclosing information, which would highlight how specific individuals came to be of interest to the MPS, would have the effect of compromising our law enforcement functions, which would hinder the prevention and detection of crime.

Disclosure would technically be releasing sensitive operational information into the public domain, which would enable those with the time, capacity and inclination to try and map strategies used by the MPS.

The MPS is reliant upon the techniques used during operations and the public release of the modus operandi employed during these operations would prejudice the ability of the MPS to conduct policing of a similar nature.

Additionally MPS resources and its ability to operate effectively and efficiently would directly be affected as this information, could be manipulated by those with criminal intent to operate in those areas.

The MPS would not wish to reveal who, what and when intelligence is recorded as this would clearly undermine the law enforcement process. This would impact on police resources resulting in more criminal activity being committed, placing individuals at risk.

Section 38 - Health and Safety - Due to the circumstances surrounding the death of Sir Henry Wilson and the arrests of the relevant individuals, to disclose specific information would likely cause unnecessary mental anguish or threaten the physical health of the families of the individuals charged or the deceased’s, as well as any witnesses. It could also place the family of any witnesses named at risk of revenge from relevant organisations. The health and safety of individuals in relation to their mental or physical wellbeing is of paramount importance to MPS. Any disclosure which endangers this by showing a lack of sensitivity is likely to lead to a loss of confidence and disengagement by the public and this cannot be in the public interest.

There is a public interest in the transparency of policing operations, which would provide the public with an understanding of where public funds are used to gather intelligence and which individuals or types of organisations have been and are of interest to the police. This would in turn give assurance that the police service is appropriately and effectively engaging with the threat posed by various groups.

However, there is a very strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of police investigations and operations in the highly sensitive area of the prevention of terrorism and crime. The security of the country is of paramount importance and the Police Service will not divulge information about an organisation or individual, if to do so would undermine law enforcement process through its techniques and tactics.

Even though these tactics have evolved over time, they are still based on tactics that were used over 90 years ago. To disclose these details would allow those with a criminal intent to know how to identify what level of policing activity is likely to take place and what tactics may or may not have been employed in an investigation.

Once such tactic would be obtaining information from a confidential source and to disclose information pertinent to any operation, that may reveal intelligence held and who this has been received from, would undermine the role and effectiveness of any future operations as the general public would be reluctant to provide information for fear that a confidential source would not be maintained. Disclosure of information which could hinder any future police operations due to individuals being hesitant to assist the police for fear of this being made public would not be in the public interest.

As much as there is public interest in knowing that policing activity is appropriate and balanced this will only be overridden in exceptional circumstances. The areas of police interest is a sensitive issue that reveals local intelligence. The Police Service is charged with enforcing the law preventing and detecting crime and protecting the communities we serve.

The effect of this information being available to the applicant and more importantly those who might wish to disrupt Police tactics, would be a requirement for a full review of police tactics and possible increase in costs to the public purse.

Additionally, releasing certain information could place the family of any named witnesses at risk of physical harm from relevant organisations. It could also cause unnecessary suffering both mentally and physically to the family of the individuals charged, the deceased as well as any witnesses named.

After weighing up the competing public interests, I find that this favours partial disclosure, as to release all information held within MEPO 3/1577 would be detrimental to law enforcement and the obtaining of information from confidential sources.

Disclosure

Please find 11 attachments containing copies of the released documentation relevant to file MEPO 3/1577.