FOI 200/25 Sexual Offences against Police Officers

Enquiry Reference:  200 - 25                                                                                          

I write in connection with regards to your Freedom of Information request.  Below is your request and our response.

 

Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, can you please for each calendar year 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024, how many complaints of sexual assault were made against serving police officers at

the force (complaints against police officers serving the force at the time of complaint)? 

 

For each complaint, please provide the rank of police officer facing complaint, the police officer's sex, if the complainant was a member of the public or a colleague, and the outcome (ie No further action, management action, charged, under investigation etc).

 

• 2020

Zero complaints for sexual assault against an officer.

 

• 2021

1-No further action as was not an officer at the time of the offence and was dealt with criminally – member of the public.

2- No further action, officer had retired before complaint made and was dealt with criminally - member of the public.

 

• 2022

1-Unknown, call terminated, and no further contact was made- member of the public.

2-Member of the public. Service acceptable, no further action.

 

• 2023

1-Member of public – Made as a misunderstanding, no assault – de-recorded

2-Member of public – Service acceptable as this was viewed on BWV

 

• 2024

1-Member of public - BWV viewed and no evidence, so de-recorded

2-Member of the public. De- recorded as no further contact was received.

 

Having made enquiries above is all the information we will disclose and for anything else we would rely on the following:

 

Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 places two duties on public authorities.  Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Section 1(1) (a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held.  The second duty at Section 1(1) (b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held.  Where exemptions are relied upon, Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act requires that I provide the applicant with a notice which: a) states that fact b) specifies the exemption(s) in question and c) state (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.

 

Cleveland Police can confirm we hold the information relevant to your request as the duty in Section 1(1) (a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the following exemptions:

 

Section 31(1)(g) by virtue of (2)(b) Law Enforcement

Section 40(2) Personal Information

 

Section 31 is a prejudice based and qualified exemption, which requires the Harm in disclosure to be identified and additionally requires a public interest test to be conducted.

 

Section 40(2) is an absolute exemption which does not require me to evidence the harm that disclosure would cause and does not require consideration of a public interest test in justification of its use.

 

This exemption is engaged where disclosure of information could lead to the identification of an individual, either from that information alone or combined with other information from within the Police Service or public domain. In this case, releasing a further breakdown is highly likely to identify the individuals concerned. Such a disclosure would breach an individual's rights to privacy.

 

Factors favouring disclosure for Section 31

The Police Service is charged with enforcing the law, preventing and detecting crime and protecting the communities we serve and there is a public interest in the transparency of policing and use of Public Funds especially where an investigation relates to a serving officer and relates to upholding these principles. The release of such information would provide further and accurate information in relation to recent public debate.

 

Factors favouring non-disclosure for Section 31

The Cleveland Police Service is committed to demonstrating proportionality and accountability to the appropriate authorities.  However, if the Cleveland Police Service were to either confirm or deny that any other information was held law enforcement may either be compromised, or it could significantly weaken any on-going and any future investigations.

No inference can be taken from this refusal that any other information requested does or does not exist.

Balancing Test

Irrespective of whether information is or isn’t held, public safety and the ability to deliver effective law enforcement is of paramount importance to the Police Service. Confirmation or denial of whether information is held would undoubtedly compromise law enforcement.  As much as there is public interest in knowing that policing activity is appropriate and balanced in matters of investigative matters both locally and nationally this will only be overridden in exceptional circumstances.  It is our opinion that for these issues the balancing test for disclosure is not made out. 

In accordance with Section 17(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this notification acts as a Refusal Notice to this section of your request. 

 

Please note that all statistical data supplied in relation to Freedom of Information requests is a snapshot of data held at the time the request was received by the Freedom of Information office and is subject to constant change/updates.

 

The Cleveland Police response to your request is unique and it should be noted that Police Forces do not use generic systems or identical procedures to capture and record data therefore responses from Cleveland Police should not be used as a comparison with any other force response you receive.

 

If you are not satisfied with this response or any actions taken in dealing with your request, you have the right to request an independent internal review of your case under our review procedure. The Freedom of Information Code of Practice (see below link) states that a request for internal review should be made within 20 working days of the date on this response or 40 working days if extenuating circumstances to account for the delay can be evidenced. Public authorities are not obliged to accept internal reviews after this date.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/freedom-of-information-code-of-practice

Yours sincerely

Information Rights Decision Maker