ICO The complainant requested a list of prisoners who had been subject to covert surveillance in either Belgium, HMP Belmarsh or the Old Bailey during a specified period. The public authority refused to confirm or deny if it held information falling within the scope of this request, citing the exemptions provided by sections 23(5) (information relating to, or supplied by, security bodies), 24(2) (national security), 31(3) (prejudice to law enforcement), 40(5) (personal information) and 44(2) (statutory prohibitions to disclosure) of the Act in relation to HMP Belmarsh. In relation to Belgium and the Old Bailey, the complainant was advised to redirect his requests elsewhere. In relation to the HMP Belmarsh request, the Commissioner finds that the public authority applied the exemptions provided by sections 23(5) and 24(2) correctly. However, in relation to the Belgium and Old Bailey requests, the Commissioner finds that the public authority failed to confirm or deny whether it held information falling within the scope of these requests and, in so doing, did not comply with sections 1(1)(a) and 10(1). The public authority is now required to remedy this breach. The Commissioner also finds that the public authority breached sections 17(1), 17(1)(c) and 17(3)(a).
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 17 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 23 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 24 – Complaint Not upheld
[2010] UKICO FS50289146
Bailii
England and Wales
Information, Prisons
Updated: 13 December 2021; Ref: scu.531794
