Intelligence reports (180A/24)
Request
1) How many intelligence logs in total were created in 2023 by West Midlands Police?
2) Of these logs, how many are linked to financial investigation or POCA enquiries in 2023 by West Midlands Police?
3) How many intelligence logs were submitted by the Dedicated Source Handling Team (DSHU/CHIS tactic) in 2023 by West Midlands Police?
4) Of the logs submitted by the DSHU, how many relate to financial investigation or POCA enquiries in 2023 by West Midlands Police?
Response
1.How many intelligence logs in total were created in 2023 by West Midlands Police?
129,091
2.Of these logs, how many are linked to financial investigation or POCA enquiries in 2023 by West Midlands Police?
3. How many intelligence logs were submitted by the Dedicated Source Handling Team (DSHU/CHIS tactic) in 2023 by West Midlands Police?
4. Of the logs submitted by the DSHU, how many relate to financial investigation or POCA enquiries in 2023 by West Midlands Police?
For questions 2, 3, and 4 above.
West Midlands Police will neither confirm nor deny that we hold any of the requested information, as the following exemptions apply.
s24(2) National Security,
s30(3) Investigations
s31(3) Law Enforcement.
These exemptions and explanatory notes are shown here:
In line with the above, I am required to complete a Prejudice Test/Public Interest Test (PIT) on disclosure, in relation to Section 24; Section 30; and Section 31 above. Please find this PIT attached below.
No inference can be taken from this refusal that the information you have requested does or does not exist.
…………….
Public interest Test (PIT)
Section 24(2) National Security Section 30(3) Investigations Section 31(3) Law Enforcement
Harm in Confirming or Denying Information is Held
Confirming whether any relevant information is or is not held would provide details of the procedures and capabilities of West Midlands Police. Placing this information into the public domain would provide criminals and terrorists with detailed information regarding the capabilities of the police service and thereby allow them to more fully understand the extent of the service’s level of intelligence or lack off thereof. Such knowledge would lead to the undermining of investigative tactics.
Therefore, confirmation or denial would form valuable intelligence for individuals with criminal intent and could be used in order to avoid detection and subsequent prosecution. Consequently, this would have a negative impact on the functionality of a system which is designed to assist officers gather evidence in order to effectively investigate offences.
In addition, any disclosure, no matter how generic, which may assist a criminal, terrorist or terrorist organisation will adversely affect public safety.
Public Interest Considerations
Section 24(2) National Security
Factors favouring complying with Section 1(1)(a) confirming that information is held
It is important that the public is aware of how public funds are spent and resources distributed within an area of policing as a result of intelligence reports. Confirmation or denial of whether information exists relating to a specific type of intelligence report / area of business would enable the general public to hold West Midlands Police to account.
Factors against complying with Section 1(1)(a) confirming or denying that any information is held
Considering the current security climate within the United Kingdom, no information (such as the citing of an exemption which confirms information pertinent to this request is held, or conversely, stating ‘no information is held’) which may aid a terrorist should be disclosed. To what extent this information may aid a terrorist is unknown, but it is clear that it will have an impact on a force’s ability to monitor terrorist activity.
By confirming or denying any policing information of this nature would render national security measures less effective. This would lead to the compromise of ongoing or future operations to protect the security or infra-structure of the UK and increase the risk of harm to the public.
Section 30(3) Investigations
Factors favouring complying with Section 1(1)(a) confirming that information is held
Confirming or denying whether information exists relevant to this request would lead to a better-informed general public. This would promote public trust in West Midlands Police by providing transparency and demonstrating accountability regarding police capability.
Factors against complying with Section 1(1)(a) neither confirming nor denying that information exists
Modern-day policing is intelligence led and West Midlands Police shares information with other law enforcement agencies as part of their investigative processes. To confirm or not whether release information on the use of intelligence submissions could hinder the prevention and detection of crime as well as undermine the partnership approach to investigations and law enforcement.
Section 31(3) Law Enforcement
Factors favouring complying with Section 1(1)(a) to confirm or deny that information is held
Confirming or denying whether information exists relevant to this request would lead to a better-informed general public. This would promote public trust in West Midlands Police by providing transparency and demonstrating accountability regarding police capability.
Factors against complying with Section 1(1)(a) neither confirming nor denying that information exists
Confirming or denying whether any information is held for this request at this time would not be in the public interest and has the potential to undermine any ongoing investigation. This would ultimately hinder the prevention and detection of crime.
Police Forces rely on information being supplied by the public. Irrespective of whether information pertinent to questions 2, 3,4 is or isn’t held, by applying substantive exemptions would indicate that information is held and is currently being investigated. Such action would act as a deterrent to the public to provide intelligence to the Force which would further undermine public safety, with repercussions that could hinder the prevention of detection of crime.
Balancing Test
For a public interest test, issues that favour disclosure need to be measured against issues that favour non-disclosure. The public interest is not what interests the public, or a particular individual, but will it serve the greater good, if released, to the wider community as a whole.
Having considered the arguments for and against, the public interest test favours maintaining the stance of neither confirming nor denying whether any information is held.
Where information does not impact on any future possible investigation, or where the
detriment is not large, there is a public interest in providing information to ensure greater
transparency. This is significant as it would help increase public confidence in the force, and
may encourage more victims and witnesses to come forward to submit intelligence to the police. However, the police service is responsible for enforcing the law, preventing and detecting crime and protecting the communities we serve, and the release of the requested information may have a negative impact on operational law enforcement and may put communities and individuals at risk.
As part of the policing purpose, information is gathered which can be highly sensitive relating
to high profile investigative activity. Police forces work in conjunction with other agencies and
on a daily basis information is freely shared in line with information sharing protocols.
Modern day policing is intelligence led and this is particularly pertinent with regard to law
enforcement. Weakening the mechanisms used to monitor any type of criminal activity,
would place the security of the country at an increased level of danger. West Midlands Police will not disclose information that could compromise the future law enforcement, investigations or National Security
Attachments
No attachments