RSO Notification (4402_13)

Request / Response

1. Could you please provide me with the following information, for January 1, 2013, until September 18, 2013.

a) The total number of sex offenders, specifically those initially handed notification requirements for an indefinite period, who have applied for a review
b) A breakdown showing the number of those applications that were successful, refused, still pending (or any other category used like this)
c) For each sex offender who was successful in their application, please provide a brief description of the charges on which they were originally convicted
d) For each sex offender who was successful in their application, please provide a summary of the reasoning behind the force’s judgement

2. a),b),c) and d) The same for the full calendar year 2012

3. a),b),c) and d) The same for the full calendar year 2011

DECISION UNDER THE TERMS OF THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

We can confirm that all of the above information is held by West Midlands Police. However, while the majority of the information is attached to this email I am afraid that I am not required by statute to release all of the information requested. Please find attached (4402_attachment). This letter serves as a Refusal Notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) for the parts of the document that have not been released.

REASONS FOR DECISION

The Freedom of Information Act places two responsibilities on public authorities, the first of which is to confirm what information it holds and secondly to then disclose that information, unless exemptions apply.

In this case, this letter represents a Refusal Notice for the charges and successful removal judgements. The information is exempt by virtue of the following exemptions:

Section 31 (1) (a) (b) (Law enforcement)
Section 40 (2) (Personal data)

Section 40 (2) is an absolute and class based exemption if to release the information exists would breach the third party’s data protection rights.  In this case to release this personal information would not constitute fair processing of the data and therefore would breach the first of the principles within the Data Protection Act 1998. As this exemption is class based I am not required to identify the harm in disclosure and in this instance I believe that the right to privacy outweighs any public interest in release. Due to the low number of successful applications it may be possible to identify an individual when combining this and other data together.

With reference to the application of Section 31, I am required to complete a Prejudice Test/Public Interest Test (PIT) on disclosure. Please find this PIT attached (4402_PIT).

Attachments

4402_PIT_01
4402_attachment

Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed