National Offender Management Service Clive House 70 Petty France London SW1H 9EX T 0300 047 3000 Richard Holmes Investigations Correspondent BuzzFeed richard.holmes@buzzfeed.com www.justice.gov.uk 26 May 2015 Our Reference: 104637 Freedom of Information Request Dear Mr Holmes, Thank you for your e-mail of 13 April, in which you asked for the following information from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ):    I would be grateful for records of all Security Intelligence Reports filed by prison staff identifying a colleague as corrupt. I would like this data to be laid out numerically by which prison the report was filed from and separated by which calendar year each report was made. I addition to this information I would like to know how many of these reports were acted upon, how many reported officers were excluded and the number of officers convicted of criminal offences. The time frame in which I would like to receive this data is the past five calendar years from 01.01.10 to 31.12.15. Your request has been handled under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). I can confirm that the department holds the information that you have requested but on this occasion we will not be able to provide all of it to you as some is exempt from disclosure. Data on outcomes from investigations into alleged staff corruption are recorded by financial years, and I am pleased to provide the recorded number of incidents for the past five financial years. The table below shows the number of convictions, police cautions, dismissals and exclusions of staff from prisons in England and Wales. Convictions Police Cautions Dismissals Exclusions 2010 2011 17 20 7 11 16 17 40 48 2012 24 9 14 45 2013 23 15 16 72 2014 26 5 17 81 2015 26 3 12 110 We consider that the rest of the information you have requested is exempt from disclosure under section 31(1)(a) of the FOIA. This provides that information is exempt if its disclosure under the FOIA would, or would be likely to prejudice the prevention and detection of crime. In line with the terms of this exemption in the FOIA, we have also considered whether it would be in the public interest for us to provide you with the information, despite the exemption being applicable. In this case, we have concluded that the public interest favours withholding the information. When assessing whether or not it was in the public interest to disclose the information to you, we took into account the following factors: Public interest considerations favouring disclosure We recognise that disclosure would provide greater transparency and enable the public to appreciate the frequency of the use of corruption prevention reporting and the resources required to tackle crime in prisons. This would increase general understanding of the need for such tactics and the circumstances in which they are used. Disclosure may provide opportunities for public discussion on crime in prisons. Public interest considerations favouring withholding the information We believe however that it is more in the public interest to withhold this information because it could be used to subvert the effective use of corruption prevention reporting by indicating the extent to which it can be used over a specific period. This information would prove invaluable to those engaged in criminality within prisons and would indicate or confirm the extent to which activity was undertaken. This could lead criminals to alter their behaviour and methods, which could in turn frustrate investigations and our ability to counter criminality in prisons. The fact that the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) uses corruption prevention reporting is a matter of public record but the extent to which we use that information across the prison estate may highlight weaknesses in operational response and provide tactical advantage to criminals as they may conclude that risks were worth taking in view of the information provided. It should also be remembered that NOMS has finite resources and therefore needs to target its investigative capability to address the threats posed by serious criminality. Any information that presents information to criminals is likely to mean that NOMS will not easily be able to recover the initiative. We reached the view that, on balance, the public interest is better served by withholding this information under section 31(1)(a) of the FOIA at this time. You can find out more about section 31 by reading the extract from the FOIA and some guidance points we consider when applying this exemption, attached at the end of this letter. You can also find more information by reading the full text of the FOIA, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/section/31 and further guidance. The vast majority of our staff are honest, hard-working professionals. Anyone who is found to be corrupt faces severe consequences and criminal prosecution. You have the right to appeal our decision if you think it is incorrect. Details can be found in the ‘How to Appeal’ section attached at the end of this letter. Disclosure Log You can also view information that the MoJ has disclosed in response to previous FOI requests. Responses are anonymised and published on our on-line disclosure log which can be found on the MoJ website: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice/series/freedom-ofinformation-disclosure-log Yours sincerely Security Group NOMS How to Appeal Internal Review If you are not satisfied with this response, you have the right to an internal review. The handling of your request will be looked at by someone who was not responsible for the original case, and they will make a decision as to whether we answered your request correctly. If you would like to request a review, please write or send an email within two months of the date of this letter to the Data Access and Compliance Unit at the following address: Data Access and Compliance Unit (10.34), Information & Communications Directorate, Ministry of Justice, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9AJ E-mail: data.access@justice.gsi.gov.uk Information Commissioner’s Office If you remain dissatisfied after an internal review decision, you have the right to apply to the Information Commissioner’s Office. The Commissioner is an independent regulator who has the power to direct us to respond to your request differently, if he considers that we have handled it incorrectly. You can contact the Information Commissioner’s Office at the following address: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF Internet address: https://www.ico.gov.uk/Global/contact_us.aspx EXPLANATION OF FOIA – SECTION 31 - LAW ENFORCEMENT We have provided below additional information about Section 31 of the Freedom of Information Act. We have included some extracts from the legislation, as well as some of the guidance we use when applying it. We hope you find this information useful. The legislation Section 1: Right of Access to information held by public authorities (1) Any person making a request for information to a public authority is entitled— (a) to be informed in writing by the public authority whether it holds information of the description specified in the request, and (b) if that is the case, to have that information communicated to him. Section 31: Law Enforcement (1) Information which is not exempt information by virtue of section 30 is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice— (a) the prevention or detection of crime, (b) the apprehension or prosecution of offenders, (c) the administration of justice, (d) the assessment or collection of any tax or duty or of any imposition of a similar nature, (e) the operation of the immigration controls, (f) the maintenance of security and good order in prisons or in other institutions where persons are lawfully detained, (g) the exercise by any public authority of its functions for any of the purposes specified in subsection (2), (h) any civil proceedings which are brought by or on behalf of a public authority and arise out of an investigation conducted, for any of the purposes specified in subsection (2), by or on behalf of the authority by virtue of Her Majesty’s prerogative or by virtue of powers conferred by or under an enactment, or (i) any inquiry held under the Fatal Accidents and Sudden Deaths Inquiries (Scotland) Act 1976 to the extent that the inquiry arises out of an investigation conducted, for any of the purposes specified in subsection (2), by or on behalf of the authority by virtue of Her Majesty’s prerogative or by virtue of powers conferred by or under an enactment. (2) The purposes referred to in subsection (1)(g) to (i) are— (a) the purpose of ascertaining whether any person has failed to comply with the law, (b) the purpose of ascertaining whether any person is responsible for any conduct which is improper, (c) the purpose of ascertaining whether circumstances which would justify regulatory action in pursuance of any enactment exist or may arise, (d) the purpose of ascertaining a person’s fitness or competence in relation o the management of bodies corporate or in relation to any profession or other activity which he is, or seeks to become, authorised to carry on, (e) the purpose of ascertaining the cause of an accident, (f) the purpose of protecting charities against misconduct or mismanagement (whether by trustees or other persons) in their administration, (g) the purpose of protecting the property of charities from loss or misapplication, (h) the purpose of recovering the property of charities, (i) the purpose of securing the health, safety and welfare of persons at work, and (j) the purpose of protecting persons other than persons at work against risk to health or safety arising out of or in connection with the actions of persons at work. (3) The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that, compliance with section 1(1)(a) would, or would be likely to, prejudice any of the matters mentioned in subsection (1). Guidance Section 31 is concerned with protecting a wide range of law enforcement interests and its application turns on whether disclosure would be likely to prejudice those interests. Some interests that are protected by section 31 are drawn quite widely, for example: the administration of justice, the prevention or detection of crime and the operation of immigration controls. But section 31 also applies where the exercise by any public authority of certain specified functions would be prejudiced by disclosure. Those functions include: ascertaining whether a person is responsible for improper conduct, determining the cause of an accident and ascertaining a person's fitness to carry on a profession. This section is not restricted to information of any particular description; it turns on consideration of the likely effects of any disclosure. Examples of circumstances in which the prejudicial effects referred to in this part of this exemption are most likely to be relevant could include the following disclosures:       intelligence about anticipated criminal activities information relating to planned police operations, including specific planned operations, and policies and procedures relating to operational activity; information relating to the identity and role of police informers information relating to police strategies and tactics in seeking to prevent crime information whose disclosure would facilitate the commission of any offence; and information whose disclosure would prejudice the fair trial of any person against whom proceedings have been or may be instituted.