Jenna Corderoy v The Information Commissioner & Anor
[2024] UKFTT 105 (GRC)
Alastair Logan v The Information Commissioner
11 June 2024
[2024] UKFTT 476 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
The government refused to release police files about the Guildford Four bombing case, claiming it would hurt future investigations. A court ruled that the files should be released because there are no active investigations, and the public has a right to know the full story, especially since the original convictions were a major miscarriage of justice.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against the Information Commissioner's decision notice upholding the Home Office's refusal to disclose information related to the Habershon Report on the Guildford and Woolwich bombings.
- •The Habershon Report investigated Provisional IRA activities and contained evidence potentially relevant to the Guildford Four case.
- •The Home Office relied on s.31(1)(a)-(c) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) to withhold the information, claiming it would prejudice future investigations and the ongoing Coroner's inquest.
- •The Appellant argued that no active investigations existed and the Coroner had deemed the report irrelevant to his inquest.
- •The Tribunal considered whether s.31(1)(a)-(c) was engaged and, if not, whether the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed disclosure.
Legal Principles
Section 31(1)(a)-(c) of the FOIA allows for exemption if disclosure would prejudice the prevention or detection of crime, apprehension or prosecution of offenders, or administration of justice.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Section 2(2)(b) of the FOIA states that even if information is exempt under Part II, it must be disclosed if the public interest in disclosing it outweighs the public interest in maintaining the exemption.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Tribunal must assess the likelihood of prejudice based on the facts at the time of the initial refusal (Montague v Information Commissioner).
Montague v Information Commissioner and Department for International Trade [2022] UKUT 104 (ACC)
To engage s.31(1), a causal link must be demonstrated between disclosure and the harm claimed. The chance of prejudice must be a real and significant risk.
Public Law Project v Information Commissioner [2023] UKFTT 00102 (GRC); Department for Work and Pensions v Information Commissioner
Outcomes
The Home Office was not entitled to rely on s.31(1)(a)-(c) of the FOIA.
The Tribunal found the chance of prejudice to future investigations was slim given the lack of current investigations and the Coroner's restricted remit. The public interest in disclosing the information, particularly concerning the Guildford Four miscarriage of justice, outweighed any potential harm.
In the alternative, the public interest in maintaining the exemption under s.31(1)(a)-(c) does not outweigh the public interest in disclosing the information.
The Tribunal weighed the potential harm to law enforcement against the significant public interest in transparency and accountability, particularly given the known miscarriage of justice in the Guildford Four case.