Information Commissioner's Office

Sussex Police

9 June 2014, Police and criminal justice

The complainant submitted a request to Sussex Police for a copy of an ‘internal review’ it conducted in 2012 about an investigation it had undertaken in 2008 following an allegation by a woman that Jimmy Savile had sexually assaulted her in 1970. Sussex Police withheld the requested information in its entirety on the basis of section 30 (investigations) and furthermore argued that parts of the information were also exempt on the basis of the exemptions contained at the following sections of FOIA: 40 (personal data), 41 (information provided in confidence) and 21 (reasonably accessible by other means). The Commissioner accepts that the requested information is exempt on the basis of section 30. However, with the exception of certain parts, the Commissioner has concluded that the public interest favours disclosure. Furthermore, in the circumstances of the case, the Commissioner has found that section 21 has been wrongly applied. With regard to the application of sections 40 and 41, the Commissioner has concluded that the vast majority of the information withheld under these exemptions had been correctly withheld on the basis of section 30. The only exception to this is a small proportion of information concerning names of police staff which are exempt on the basis of section 40; some miscellaneous information which is not exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 40; and some remaining information which the Commissioner believes is in the public domain and thus not exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 41. The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide the complainant with a copy of the ‘internal review’ that he requested. The only redactions that can be made to this document are those identified in the confidential annex which has been provided to Sussex Police only.

FOI 21: Upheld FOI 30: Partly upheld