FOI Illegal abortion crime 2020/21 (0803-2022/23)
Request
Please could you provide the following information regarding recorded crimes of procuring an illegal abortion as per Home Office data published here: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/police-recorded-crime-open-data-tables
- Home Office data shows that North Yorkshire Police recorded one crime of procuring an illegal abortion in the last decade – in 2020/21. Please could you provide the case logs for these cases, redacted to protect the anonymity of those involved.
Response
Extent and Result of Searches to Locate Information
To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted within North Yorkshire Police.
I can confirm that the information you have requested is held by North Yorkshire Police.
Decision
I have decided to the requested information, namely a redacted case log pursuant to section 40 (Personal Information) and section 31 (Law Enforcement) Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act). This is to prevent the identification and protect the anonymity for those involved in each case. In addition, the public make reports to the police, (some of which are highly sensitive) in confidence and regardless of whether all personal information is redacted to protect the identity of those involved, the details of a report made to the police could potentially impede the victim’s future confidence in the police. Please see the exemption below.
Exemption Explanation
Section 17 of the Act requires North Yorkshire Police, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you the applicant with a notice which: (a) states that fact, (b) specifies the exemption in question and (c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.
Section 40(2) – Personal Information
Section 40(2) is an absolute class-based exemption, which does not require a public interest test, but requires the balancing of the legitimate interests of the public against the interests of the individual under the first Data Protection Principle; in that processing of personal data must be lawful and fair (DPA 2018 35(1), EUGDPR Article 5(1)).
Where an individual can be identified by such data, releasing it would clearly breach the first data protection principle of being ‘fair’ to the data subject.
This exemption applies because the right given under the FOI Act to request official information held by public authorities does not apply to the personal data of third parties where disclosure of that information would not be fair to the individual, and where there is no legitimate public interest in disclosure.
In all the circumstances of the case it has been determined that the duty to the individual under the Data Protection Act 2018 & EU General Data Protection Regulations, and the public interest in maintaining the exemption from disclosure of personal information held by the force in such instances, outweighs the public interest in disclosure. In this instance, personal information can only be disclosed to the individual concerned.
Releasing personal details to a person other than the data subject would not only breach the data subject’s Data Protection rights it may also breach the obligations placed on an authority under the European Convention on Human Rights
Section 31 – Law Enforcement
Section 31 is a prejudice-based qualified exemption and there is a requirement to articulate the harm as well as carrying out a public interest test.
Evidence of Harm
As you may be aware, disclosure under FOIA is a release to the public at large. Whilst not questioning the motives of the applicant, disclosing details of crimes committed would allow patterns of offending to be recognised which may compromise Law Enforcement and any future tactics or plans to apprehend offenders. This would be to the detriment of providing an efficient policing service and a failure in providing a duty of care to all members of the public.
Case logs are sensitive to the reporting person and albeit it can be redacted to protect their identity, disclosure of such information may impact the future relationship between the victims and the police. This could subsequently also affect any future reports they may wish to make, due to the risk of that information would be released into the public domain, via FOIs.
Furthermore, the Police are there to support the public and deliver effective law enforcement, including the investigation of suspects and the protection and safeguarding of victims. Releasing any specific documents to a criminal investigation could compromise the personal safety of any victims if an offender is unaware their crime has been reported and in turn potentially impact any subsequent/future investigation.
Providing details of how specific offences have occurred out may also facilitate future crimes. It is widely known that Freedom of Information is utilised and exploited by criminals to gain intelligence of policing activities. The release of case logs can give other criminals knowledge of how to commit similar, and in some cases more sophisticated, offences.
Information that adversely affects public safety and confidence will have a negative impact on law enforcement.
Factors favouring disclosure under Section 31
Releasing information would allow the public to see the type of offences reported, making them more aware of such offences which would enable them to take any necessary precautions to protect themselves.
It would show how public funds are being spent in relation to protecting the public.
Factors against disclosure under Section 31
A fear of crime would be realised by the public.
Victims could be placed at risk if other potential offenders are unaware of police involvement as the case logs/documents can provide specific details about the offence.
Any offences reported, especially those of a sexual nature or where children are involved, are a very sensitive area and individuals need to ensure that the reports they provided are confidential. Individuals may therefore become reluctant to provide information, which could assist an investigation, due to concerns that the information provided may be requested and released under Freedom of Information requests.
Balance test
The safety of the public is of paramount importance and the Police service will not divulge the information, if to do so would place the safety of individuals at risk or compromise law enforcement.
Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing, ongoing criminal activity and providing assurance that the police service is appropriately and accurately recording and investigating crime, there is also a very strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of police reports and those that report crime especially in the highly sensitive areas such as sexual offences and offences involving children.
As much as there is public interest in knowing that policing activity is appropriate and balanced this will only be overridden in exceptional circumstances. It is our opinion that for these issues the balancing test for exempting your request for planning information is not made out.
Pursuant to Section 17(1) of the Act this letter acts as a refusal notice under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in relation to part of your request.
Please note that systems used for recording information are not generic, nor are the procedures used locally in capturing the data. It should be noted therefore that this force’s response to your questions should not be used for comparison purposes with any other responses you may receive.