ICO Decision on Police Conduct Reports
Summary
The ICO issued a decision regarding a Freedom of Information request for police conduct reports concerning a former Metropolitan Police officer. The ICO upheld the exemption under section 30(1)(a)(i) FOIA, finding that investigations and proceedings information should remain withheld.
What changed
The Independent Office for Police Conduct (ICO) has issued a decision notice regarding a Freedom of Information (FOI) request for investigation reports into the conduct of a deceased former Metropolitan Police officer, Warren Arter. The ICO upheld the exemption under section 30(1)(a)(i) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, which pertains to investigations and proceedings. The decision states that the balance of the public interest favors maintaining the exemption, and no further steps are required from the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).
This decision means that the requested investigation reports will not be disclosed. For compliance officers within law enforcement or government agencies dealing with FOI requests, this reinforces the application of the investigations exemption in cases involving former officers and ongoing or concluded internal proceedings. While this specific case does not impose new obligations, it serves as a reminder of the ICO's stance on withholding such sensitive information and the importance of properly applying and justifying exemptions.
What to do next
- Review internal FOI exemption justifications for investigations and proceedings.
Source document (simplified)
Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC)
- Date 19 March 2026
- Sector Central government, Police and criminal justice
- Decision(s) FOI 30: Not upheld The complainant requested investigation reports into the conduct of the deceased former police officer Warren Arter, formerly a serving officer in the Metropolitan Police Service. The Independent Office for Police Conduct (“IOPC”) withheld the information, under section 30(1)(a)(i) FOIA: investigations and proceedings. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 30(1)(a)(i) is engaged, and the balance of the public interest favours the exemption being maintained. The Commissioner does not require the IOPC to take any steps.
Named provisions
Related changes
Source
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get Data Privacy & Cybersecurity alerts
Weekly digest. AI-summarized, no noise.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when ICO Decision Notices publishes new changes.