Palestine Action deployment 996/2025
FOI Reference: 996/2025
Request:
- How many times were counter-terrorism officers deployed to Palestine Action marches in the past year?
- Prior to the UK Government proscribing Palestine Action, had your force assessed it as meeting the threshold for counter-terrorism action in Wales?
- How many individuals have been arrested or imprisoned due to their association with, membership in, or attendance at Palestine Action marches?
- What specific charges were brought against these individuals?
Response 1:
Dyfed-Powys Police can neither confirm nor deny that it holds any information pertinent to this request as the duty in Section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the following exemptions:
Section 24(2) ‘National Security’
Section 31(3) ‘Law Enforcement’
Please see the end of this document for an explanation of these exemptions.
Response 2:
Dyfed-Powys Police can neither confirm nor deny that it holds any information pertinent to this request as the duty in Section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the following exemptions:
Section 24(2) ‘National Security’
Section 30(3) ‘Investigations’
Section 31(3) ‘Law Enforcement’
Section 40(5) ‘Personal Information’.
Please see the end of this document for an explanation of these exemptions.
Response 3:
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information requested, as outlined below.
0
Response 4: N/A
Exemption explanations:
Overall Harm
Any release under FOIA is a disclosure to the world, not just to the individual making the request. Providing any notice that confirms or denies the existence of any policing operations at protests would make security measures less effective. In addition, the Police are charged with enforcing the law, detecting and preventing crime, and protecting the communities we serve. Confirming or denying whether any information is held would impact on the effectiveness of police investigations, thereby hindering the prevention and detection of crime.
The threat from terrorism cannot be ignored. It is generally recognised that the international security landscape is increasingly complex and unpredictable. The current UK threat level from international terrorism, based on intelligence, is assessed as substantial which means that a terrorist attack is likely.
In order to counter criminal and terrorist behaviour, it is vital that the police have the ability to work together, where necessary covertly, to obtain intelligence within current legislative frameworks to assist in the investigative process to ensure the successful arrest and prosecution of offenders who commit or plan to commit crime including acts of extremism and terrorism.
To achieve this goal, it is vitally important that information sharing takes place between police officers, members of the public, police forces as well as other law enforcement bodies within the United Kingdom. Such action would support policing and counter‑terrorism measures in the fight to deprive criminals including extremists of their ability to commit crime.
The impact of providing information under FOI which aids in identifying whether or not Dyfed-Powys Police has deployed counter-terrorism officers and/or conducted any assessments would provide those intent on committing related acts of crime in the future with valuable information as to the police’s ability to deal with such.
Public Interest
Factors favouring confirmation or denial – Section 24 - Providing confirmation or denial as to the extent of any operations safeguarding matters of national security at large scale events would improve public confidence in the work of the police and reassure them that Dyfed-Powys Police is taking necessary steps to counter extremism and terrorism.
Factors against confirmation or denial – Section 24 - If Dyfed-Powys Police were to confirm or deny that any information was or was not held, this could prejudice the Government’s ability to maintain national security. It is not in the public interest to disclose the capabilities of the police service and other UK authorities and the operations that they may or may not use to safeguard the country. This would allow determined individuals the ability to, over time, identify which public authorities hold certain types of national security information and which do not, thereby allowing inferences to be drawn about what authorities or bodies might have an interest in certain matters of national security.
Any response that has the potential to undermine ongoing and future operations to protect the security of the United Kingdom would significantly increase the risk of harm to the community at large. Such actions would obviously not be in the best interest of the public.
Factors favouring confirmation or denial – Section 30 - Disclosing information about any investigations under an operations banner would provide a greater transparency in the investigating process and the actions of a public authority. It is clear that there is a public interest in public authorities operating in as transparent a manner as possible, as this should ensure they operate effectively and efficiently.
Factors against confirmation or denial – Section 30 - There is an inherently strong public interest in public authorities carrying out investigations to prevent and detect crime. This ensures that offenders are brought to justice and that the necessary actions are taken to safeguard public funds and resources. To allow the effectiveness of investigations to be reduced, as described in the harm above, is not in the public interest. The Police need to be allowed to carry out investigations effectively away from public scrutiny until such times as the details need to be made public, otherwise it will be difficult for accurate, thorough, and objective investigations to be carried out.
Factors favouring confirmation or denial – Section 31 - This FOIA request concerns operations conducted by Dyfed-Powys Police at large scale protests. This may include the involvement of Dyfed-Powys Police in multi-agency operations, given groups who could be involved, and there is likely to be a public interest into what specific involvement each agency had within such an investigation. Therefore, this in itself favours confirming whether the information is held.
Factors against confirmation or denial – Section 31 - To confirm or deny that any information is held would compromise law enforcement tactics, including covert activity, in areas which may include serious and organised criminality, as well as extremism and counter terrorism. This would hinder the UK Police service's ability to prevent and detect criminality overall. By confirming that Dyfed-Powys Police had deployed counter-terrorism officers and/or conducted any assessments, or alternatively stating that they had not, would give vital information to criminals regarding areas of more or less policing activity (including covert policing). Criminals could take steps to avoid detection if they are aware of force areas that do not take part in such operations. The ability of the UK police service to effectively investigate organised crime, or counter terrorist behaviour would be severely compromised.
Balancing Test
As evidenced within the harm above, confirming or denying any information is held relevant to this request would start to indicate levels of specific policing activity at force level, and more broadly from a national perspective.
The Police Service will not divulge information if to do so would place the safety of an individual at risk or undermine Law Enforcement. Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing operations, and in this case providing assurance that Dyfed-Powys Police is appropriately and effectively engaging with the threat posed by criminal and terrorist activity (either at force level or through the provision of assistance to, or from partners) there is a very strong public interest in safeguarding law enforcement, which by extension includes National Security.
As much as there is public interest in knowing that policing activity is appropriate and balanced about such matters, this will only ever be overridden in exceptional circumstances. Matters is relation to crime and terrorism are sensitive issues of intelligence value to those who would do harm, and therefore it is our opinion that for these issues the balancing test for confirming or denying whether any information is held would not be in the public interest.
Therefore, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing any information.
Section 40 is an absolute class-based exemption and therefore there is no requirement to conduct a harm or public interest test.
Section 40(5) – Personal Information:
The duty to neither confirm nor deny under this section of the Act arises if confirmation as to whether the requested information is or isn’t held would breach any of the data protection principles contained within Part 3 - Chapter 2 of the Data Protection Act 2018. Under Section 34 within Chapter 2 “The Controller in relation to personal data is responsible for and must be able to demonstrate, compliance with” Chapter 2. Such information would not be confirmed as held under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 unless there is a strong public interest. One of the main differences between the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Data Protection Act 2018 is that any information released under FOI is released into the public domain, not just the individual requesting the information and disclosure under the Act must be made with that in mind. As such, any release that identifies an individual through releasing their personal data, even third-party personal data is exempt.
Personal data is defined under Section 3 of the Data Protection Act 2018 as:
“(2) ‘Personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable living individual (subject to subsection (14)(c)).
(3) ‘Identifiable living individual’ means a living individual who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to—
(a) An identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data or an online identifier, or
(b) One or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of the individual.”
All members of the public including those employed by the force have an intrinsic right to privacy and these rights are protected by virtue of the Human Rights Act, the Data Protection Act 2018 and the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and a public authority must not interfere with that right. Any release of the information subject to the exemption is likely to compromise those rights.
Data Protection Act 2018
Part 3 – Law Enforcement – Chapter 2 Principles Section 35
The first data protection principle:
“(1) The first data protection principle is that the processing of personal data for any of the law enforcement purposes must be lawful and fair.”
UK General Data Protection Regulation
Article 5 of the GDPR – ‘Principles relating to processing of personal data’ provides:
“1. ‘Personal data’ shall be
(a) Processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner in relation to the data subject (‘lawfulness, fairness and transparency);
(b) Collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes; further processing for archiving purposes in the public interest…
2. The controller shall be responsible for, and be able to demonstrate compliance with, paragraph 1 (‘accountability’).”
Dyfed-Powys Police would not want to confirm nor deny whether any information is held, relevant to the request, if confirmation/denial could potentially identify an individual. In this case, any information that may or may not be held relevant to the request could potentially contain personal data of identifiable individual(s) and any disclosure, by citing an exemption or stating no information held would clearly breach the Data Protection Act as a consequence I am satisfied that Section 40(5) Personal Information exemption is applicable.
No inference can be taken from this refusal that the information you have requested does or does not exist.
(This is a response under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and disclosed on 05/11/2025)
|
Os oes angen y wybodaeth yma arnoch yn Gymraeg, cysylltwch â: If you require this information in Welsh, please contact: |