Section 44 In Cheshire

Under the Terrorism Act 2000 Section 44, the Police are allowed to designate areas of the country where law enforcement personnel could stop and search any person and/or vehicle without having to have a valid reason and confiscate any item that could conceivably have a terrorist purpose.

Please can you release all locations in Cheshire that are designated under Section 44.

I appreciate that some locations, the Police may be sensitive about disclosure but I would also like a total of areas actively designated under the legislation that the CPA are aware of, along with a full reason as to any non-disclosure.

In accordance with section 1 (1) (a) of the Act our response is provided below;

I can confirm that Cheshire Constabulary holds the information you have requested and I can state that there is one Section 44 authority in place within the Constabularies policing area.

In so far as the specifics of your request are concerned. Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires the Cheshire Constabulary, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you with a notice which a) states that fact, b) specifies the exemption in question and c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.

The information is exempt by virtue of the following:

• Section 23(1) Information supplied by or concerning certain Security Bodies;
• Section 24(1) National Security,
• Section 31(3) Law Enforcement and
• Section 38(1) Health and Safety.

Section 23 is a class based absolute exemption which means that the legislators have identified that there would be harm in disclosure of information where this exemption is engaged and there is no requirement to articulate the harm.

Sections 24, 31 and 38 are prejudice based qualified exemptions which means that there is a requirement to evidence the harm in disclosure as well as considering the public interest in disclosure

Harm and Public Interest Considerations

• Section 24

Terrorist activity within the United Kingdom is a real and current threat and the Police Service has a duty of care to protect the public they serve. To identify the locations where Section 44 Authorisations have been or are in place would reveal sensitive tactical information.

• Factors favouring Disclosure

By identifying the specific locations which are subject to Section 44 authorisations would provide a better awareness to the public to enable them to take steps in order to protect themselves.

• Factors favouring Non-disclosure

Whilst there is a public interest in providing reassurance that the Police Service is appropriately and effectively dealing with threats posed by terrorist attack, there is a strong public interest in safeguarding national security.

Any disclosure has the potential to undermine ongoing and future operations to protect the security of the United Kingdom which would significantly increase the risk of harm to the community at large.

• Section 31

The Police Service is charged with enforcing the law, preventing and detecting crime and protecting the communities we serve. Modern-day policing is intelligence led through liaison with other agencies and the community at large.

• Section 44 authorisations are identified by police forces using up-to-date intelligence. To identify the specific location where these authorisations are or have been active would reveal sensitive information concerning current policing operations to interested parties, and enable any terrorist organisation to map such activity and subsequently allow them to operate outside of those particular areas.
• Factors Favouring Disclosure

It could be argued that the transparency of anti-terror operations would provide a greater awareness to the public which may lead to more information (intelligence) being submitted to the Police Service.

• Factors Favouring Non-disclosure

Anti-terror investigations and operations is a highly sensitive area of policing. As evidenced within the harm above to identify the exact location of these authorisations would seriously hinder the prevention or detection of crime. If an ongoing anti-terror operation is jeopardised this would lead to a further impact on police resources as there would be a requirement for further manpower to be utilised in order to take steps to continue with the planned operation.

As stated above anti-terror investigations would rely on intelligence received from the community and other organisations. Disclosure would seriously undermine the partnership approach to law enforcement.

• Section 38

When Section 38 is engaged there must be 'actual' evidence of the harm that can be caused. To disclose information that undermines the operational integrity of anti-terror operations will adversely affect public safety. Examples of this is the tragic events of 7th July 2005 and the failed attempts in London and Glasgow on 30th June 2006.

• Balancing Test

Public safety and the security of the country is of paramount importance and the Police Service will not divulge information if to do so would adversely affect public safety and have a negative impact on both National Security and effective law enforcement. Therefore, at this moment in time, it is our opinion that for these issues the balancing test for disclosure is not made out.

Section 44 authorisations are identified by police forces using up-to-date intelligence. To identify the specific location where these authorisations are or have been active would reveal sensitive information concerning current policing operations to interested parties, and enable any terrorist organisation to map such activity and subsequently allow them to operate outside of those particular areas.