Information of the search of the Barragem do Arade Reservoir in Portugal

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.23.030664

I note you seek access to the following information:

Information concerning the recent search of the Barragem do Arade Reservoir in Portugal. Specifically the following:

1) The number of personal that flew over to the site,
2) the ranks of those individuals,
3) the flight company that those officers traveled with (British airways, Ryanair etc).
4) if officers travelled via military or private charter, the company name or military branch they flew with, and aircraft type.
5) total expenses spent on the operation, including time spent beforehand organising the travel etc.

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 31 – Law Enforcement

Reason for decision

The Operation Grange team have advised that the disclosure of the information you have requested for question 3 must be carefully managed in order to ensure that there is no prejudice to their investigation.

Our concerns with disclosing the airline we use does increase the possibility of media intrusion.

There have been occasions when planned meetings are leaked/disclosed to the media, who then wait at the airport for our arrival. By giving the name of the airline we use significantly increases the chances of the media being present when we arrive.

They have then in the past followed us to hotels, police stations etc.
This media intrusion then effects not only the MPS officers travelling, but also our international partners involved in this investigation.

Why does the section 31 exemption apply?
As you would expect, the MPS must protect the integrity of our investigation, however we are also keenly aware of the public's interest in this investigation and therefore a careful balance is needed to show that we are accountable for our decisions and actions taken on this matter.

It is important to acknowledge that this is an ongoing investigation into the disappearance of a child. As with all investigations, it is of paramount importance that the response to a Freedom of Information request does not disrupt or have any negative impact on that investigation. Clearly, such disruption to an investigation would not be in the best interests of the public. The length of time and money that is put into an investigation does not diminish the argument above.

The argument in favour of non-disclosure is significant as ultimately it is not in the best interests of the public to disclose any information that could in any way prejudice an ongoing investigation, assist offenders or increase the risk of further offences being committed.

I appreciate this may not be the full response you would have liked. However, the decision on disclosure has been made based on the understanding that the public interest is not what interests the public, but is what would be of greater good to the public as a whole, if the information were disclosed.

Disclosure

Q1 - The number of personal that flew over to the site,

There were two members of the MPS who attended the Barragem do Arade Reservoir in Portugal during the search in question.

Q2 - The ranks of those individuals,

The ranks of the officers were a Detective Chief Inspector and a member of MPS Police staff

Q3 - The flight company that those officers travelled with (British airways, Ryanair etc).

This information cannot be disclosed, please see the section 31 exemption above.

Q4 - If officers travelled via military or private charter, the company name or military branch they flew with, and aircraft type.

They travelled by a non-military, commercial flight.

Total expenses spent on the operation, including time spent beforehand organising the travel etc.

The total spend for this trip was approx. £1250