Police officers accused of gross misconduct Cases from 2017 to 2022

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.23.028043

I note you seek access to the following information:

Number of police officers accused of gross misconduct for "engaging in sexual activity" on duty each year since 2017.

Number of police officers dismissed for gross misconduct after they "engaged in sexual activity" on a "number of occasions" while on duty since 2017.

Number of police officers who faced disciplinary action for "engaging in sexual activity" on duty with a colleague each year since 2017.
Please include available details of the offence and disciplinary action taken.

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(2)&(3A)(a) - Personal Information

Reason for decision

Section 40(2)&(3A)(a) - Personal Information - Section 40(2)(a)(b) of the Act provides that any information to which a request for information relates, is exempt information if the first condition of Section 40(3A)(a) is satisfied. The first condition of Section 40(3A)(a) states that personal information is exempt if its disclosure would contravene any of the data protection principles.

There are six principles that are set out in Article 5(1)(a) of the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) that dictate when the processing of personal data is lawful. The first principle requires that any processing of personal data must be lawful, fair and transparent. Under Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR, the disclosure of personal data is considered to be lawful if:

a. There is a legitimate interest in the disclosure of that personal data.
b. The disclosure of the personal data is necessary to meet that legitimate interest.
c. The disclosure would not cause unwarranted harm to the data subject.

Having given regard to the legitimate interest test, I have found that:

a. The disclosure of the unredacted allegation summaries would provide further factual information about the 12 officer allegations in which police officers were found to have a case to answer for gross misconduct. Given the extraordinary powers that are granted to police officers in society, legitimate interests in transparency and accountability would be satisfied through the release of this information.

b. This disclosure of the requested personal data is necessary to satisfy the legitimate interest identified at point a.

c. The MPS employs over 34,000 police officers including those in the Metropolitan Special Constabulary. This number has remained relatively consistent over the last 6 years. A relatively small number of police officers employed by the MPS have been the subject of a Gross Misconduct Hearing over this period. Over the same period, an even smaller number, being 56 or fewer, have been the subject of a Gross Misconduct Hearing for engaging in sexual activity whilst on-duty. Given this, I have found that the release of the details redacted, namely officer names, ranks, genders and the specific locations of incidents of gross misconduct, would be likely to lead to identification. The risk of identification would be heightened within the MPS. The accused officers and the alleged victims would not expect the MPS to release information that would lead to their identification and the disclosure of their personal data, whether that be to the general public or their MPS colleagues. This would be unexpected and distressing to them. Furthermore, identification may lead to unwanted and unsolicited intrusion from persons interested in the facts of each case. In this regard, I believe that disclosure of this personal data would be likely to cause unwarranted harm to the data subjects in this request. The information that may lead to identification has accordingly been withheld from release under this exemption.

Personal Criminal Offence Data - A number of the sexual misconduct allegations made about MPS employees will be criminal allegations. In these cases, the release of any information that would lead to the identification of MPS employees will reveal personal criminal offence data. Having considered the legitimate interest test in respect of this personal data, I have found that:

a. The Information Commissioner (the ombudsman for the Act) guidance on the release of personal criminal offence data under the Act states:

‘Due to its sensitivity, the conditions for processing criminal offence data are very restrictive and generally concern specific, stated purposes. Consequently, only two are relevant to allow you to lawfully disclose under FOIA or the EIR. They are similar to those identified above for special category data. These are:

• consent from the data subject; or
• the processing relates to personal data which has clearly been made public by the individual concerned.

If a relevant condition cannot be met, you must not disclose the information as disclosure would be unlawful and therefore in contravention of principle (a).’

The conditions required to release personal criminal offence data are not present in this case. The release of the requested personal data does not accordingly satisfy a legitimate interest and cannot be disclosed under the Act.

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.

Disclosure

Please find enclosed a spreadsheet in which the located information has been provided. In providing a description of the alleged misconduct of those police officers found to have a ‘case to answer’ following a misconduct investigation, I have redacted information (i.e. names, locations, officer ranks and genders) that may lead to identification.

SECTION 16 - ADVICE AND ASSISTANCE
The MPS has published relevant information in response to a number of requests made about the alleged sexual misconduct of MPS employees under the Act. I have provided links to this information below.

Officers suspended/dismissed due to allegations of sexual misconduct - 01.FOI.21.018607

Serving officers accused of alleged sexual harassment/assault from 2010 to 2021 - 01.FOI.22.022899

Serving officers under investigation for sexual offences - 01.FOI.22.026354

Serving police officers accused of sexual offences and stalking from January 2019 to February 2022 - 01.FOI.22.023436

Additionally the MPS is to publish a dataset that will set out in detail, further information about the alleged sexual misconduct of police employees. This information will be published on the MPS Publication Scheme by the 31st of March 2023. I have provided a link MPS Website - Publication Scheme

Maintaining Public Trust in the MPS
Securing and maintaining the trust of the community is integral to the principle of policing by consent and to continue to do so, the MPS recognises that its staff must act with professionalism and integrity. The MPS treats each occasion when an allegation is made about the conduct of its staff extremely seriously and will fully investigate each incident to determine whether the conduct of that member of staff has breached the standards of professional behaviour. Where the conduct of staff is proven to have fallen below the standards of behaviour expected, the MPS will take robust action to ensure that its staff are held to account and that lessons are learnt from each case. Any instance where the conduct of our staff is alleged to have fallen below the standards of behaviour expected is treated extremely seriously by the MPS.