Policies on Tasers, uniform, tech and equipment for officers

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.24.038679

I note you seek access to the following information:

1. Are officers attached to your safer neighbourhood teams allowed to carry taser? If not, why not
2. Is there any plans to allow safer neighbourhood team officers to carry taser?
3. What current uniform and equipment and technology including make and models are issued to police officers?
4. Are all Met officers being issued with work laptops and mobile phones? If so, what brand are these?

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) . In relation to questions 3 and 4 has been withheld as it is exempt from disclosure by virtue of the following exemptions:

Section 31(1)(a)(b) - Law Enforcement

Reason for decision

Section 31(1)(a)(b) allows public authorities to withhold information if it is likely to or would prejudice ‘The prevention or detection of crime’ or ‘The apprehension or prosecution of offenders.

Impersonating a Police Officer - Parts of the MPS uniform are easily recognisable, as some of the public have interacted with officers in person and others may also have seen officers on television and social media segments. Whilst not all the individual items listed on the kit list are common knowledge their existence is no secret, but information regarding the make and model is of all of the kit list is not readily available. I have considered the reasons why. To provide the exact details of kit could enable individuals to replicate an officer’s uniform and therefore give those intent on impersonating a Police Officer the means to do so. This is a clear and obvious problem, and ultimately it is easy to see why this could cause harm to the general public. An individual intent on committing crime under the guise of a Police officer could do so more easily with the exact uniform. If an individual announces themselves as an officer and they are also wearing the exact uniform of an officer, it is likely that the public would trust that such an individual is who they say that they are.

The naming of brands poses a security risk - Police officers work with local communities, reduce crime, support victims and keep people safe. Laptops and mobile phones are used in part to achieve this. The make and model of a laptop or mobile phone can show which operating system a piece of equipment uses. This is in turn means that an individual can then work out the vulnerabilities of that system, and then seek to exploit it. Therefore, the release of this information allows those with malicious intent to narrow down their attacks to only certain types of devices. Arguably then, without knowing the specific brand of the laptops and mobiles phones this risk is significantly lower and so minimizes the threat of any targeted malicious actions in order to gain access to our systems.

The MPS want to be as open and transparent as possible, as openness it is linked to building trust and confidence in policing and therefore it is imperative that the appropriate information is made available to the public, when it is requested. This should not however, hinder our core functions.

It is worth noting that information that is made available under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 is published by the MPS via the publication scheme, making it readily available to the public, and not just the individual making the request. The operational capability of the MPS in response to relevant incidents must be protected, but in my public interest test I have provided tangible risks that could arise if the make, model and brand information is supplied. In the worst case scenario, the impersonation of a police officer could have serious if not devastating results, from the erosion of trust to individuals perpetrating crime under the guise of an officer. Potential vulnerability also arises if the specific brands of the laptop and mobile phone is disclosed, as this could make it easier for targeted malicious actions. It is clear that the release of the make, model and brand information would not prevent crime but rather encourage it, which negatively affects the MPS’s law enforcement function. This in turn would severely compromise and significantly weaken our ability to effectively deal with law enforcement. Accordingly, I have applied a Section 31 to this part of your request.

Disclosure

Q1 - Are officers attached to your safer neighbourhood teams allowed to carry taser? If not, why not?

Officers attached to Safer Neighbourhood Teams do not currently carry TASER; the MPS had prioritised TASER roll-out to other roles.

Q2 - Is there any plans to allow safer neighbourhood team officers to carry taser?

The MPS is currently reviewing its position and is considering the roll-out of TASER to Safer Neighbourhood Teams.

Q3 - What current uniform and equipment and technology including make and models are issued to police officers?

Please find below an excel spreadsheet titled P1 & P2 Kit list. Please note the make and model information has been withheld, please see the legal annex for a full explanation as to why.

Q4 - Are all Met officers being issued with work laptops and mobile phones? If so, what brand are these?

All MPS Officers are issued with MPS laptops and phones. Please note the brand information has been withheld.