FOI Formal complaints against serving officers 2019-2022 (0540-2022/23)
Request
I am writing to you under the Freedom of Information Act (2000) to ask that you please disclose how many formal complaints of rape, sexual assault, indecent assault, sexual harassment, harassment and/or bullying were brought against serving officers of the police force that falls under your remit, both internally and externally, in the last 3 years (2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22).
Specifically:
Q1. How many of these allegations have been made against serving male officers in each of the three years identified above?
Q2. How many of these allegations have been made against serving female officers in each of the three years identified above?
Q3. How many of these allegations against male officers were upheld?
Q4. How many of these upheld allegations against male officers resulted in disciplinary action?
Q5. How many male officers were dismissed from the force as a result of the disciplinary action (answer to Question 4) taken against them?
Q6. How many female police officers were dismissed from the force as a result of the disciplinary action (answer to Question 4) taken against them?
Q7. How many male officers have resigned or retired before the outcome of a police misconduct hearing (in the last 3 years 2019-2020, 2020-2021 and 2021-22)?
Q8. How many Non Disclosure Agreements have female police officers signed as victims of rape, sexual assault, indecent assault, sexual harassment, harassment and/or bullying as of the last 3 years 2019-2020, 2020-2021 and 2021-22?
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 today decided to disclose some of the located information to you.
Q1.
2019-2020 – 5
2020-2021 – 4
2021-2022 – 6
Q2. Zero
Q3. 2
Q4. 2
Q5. 3
Q6. N/A
Q7. 2
Q8. Zero
Exemption Explanation
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, releasing any information held regarding the number of misconduct investigations could allow criminals to note what capacity and tactical capabilities the force had, allowing them to target specific areas of the UK to conduct their criminal/terrorist activities. This would lead to an increase in harm of attacks and compromise Law Enforcement. 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.
Furthermore, the Police are there to support the public and deliver effective law enforcement. Releasing details whilst any investigation is ongoing could prejudice the ongoing matters.
Information that undermines the operational integrity of the police will adversely affect public safety and have a negative impact on both national security and law enforcement.
Factors favouring disclosure under Section 31
Releasing information held relating to ongoing miscodunct investigations would provide an insight into the police resources and enable the public to have a better understanding of the effectiveness of the police.
It would show how public funds are being spent in relation to protecting the public.
Information would ensure transparency and accountability and enable the public to see what tactics are deployed by the Police Service to tackle/assist in fighting crime.
Factors against disclosure under Section 31
It can be argued that there are significant risks associated with providing information in relation to any aspects that can assist criminal planning and that any nation’s security arrangements, by releasing the information, may reveal the relative vulnerability of what we may be trying to protect.
The Police Service would not wish to reveal resource information that would undermine the law enforcement operations and would impact on police resources, as more crime would be committed because criminals/terrorists would know which forces had less/more capability. This in turn would place the public at a greater risk and a fear of crime would be realised, especially for more vulnerable areas.
Balance test
The security of the public and the country is of paramount importance and the Police service will not divulge the resources, if to do so would place the safety of individuals at risk, due to providing freely available (single point) information under such requests and which in turn would undermine National Security or compromise law enforcement.
Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing resources and providing assurance that the police service is appropriately prepared and effectively engaging with the threat posed by various groups or individuals, there is a very strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of police resources and operations in the highly sensitive areas such as extremism, crime prevention, public disorder and terrorism prevention.
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 in response 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.