The complainant requested information relating to the ICO’s investigation into the unlawful trade in confidential personal information which was known as Operation Motorman. This included within its scope the names of journalists, the names of publications and types of data linked to transactions identified in the ‘What Price Privacy Now’ report. It also included the information contained within a document seized by the ICO entitled the Blagger Training Manual, the Operation Motorman ‘case file’ and communications relating to the Operation Motorman investigation. The Commissioner’s decision is that the ICO was entitled to rely on section 40(2) with section 40(3)(a)(i) of the FOIA (third party personal data) to withhold the names of journalists linked to transactions identified in the What Price Privacy Now report. He also considers that section 44(1)(a) of the FOIA (prohibitions on disclosure) applies to this information by virtue of section 59 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). The Commissioner considers that the ICO was entitled to rely on section 30(1)(b) of the FOIA (investigations conducted by public authorities) to withhold the information contained in the Blagger Training Manual that has not previously been published in the What Price Privacy report, the Operation Motorman ‘case file’ and the communications relating to the Operation Motorman investigation. He considers that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. In relation to the information in the Blagger Training Manual which has previously been published in the What Price Privacy report the Commissioner considers that section 30(1)(b) of the FOIA is engaged but that the public interest in disclosing the information is at least equal to the public interest in maintaining the exemption. He therefore considers that the ICO was incorrect to withhold this information under section 30(1)(b) of the FOIA. However, he considers that section 21(1) of the FOIA (information accessible to the applicant by other means) applies to this information. The Commissioner does not require the ICO to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 21 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 30 – Complaint Partly Upheld, FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 44 – Complaint Not upheld
Citations:
[2012] UKICO FS50419834
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 25 September 2022; Ref: scu.529737
